ReviewJournal of rhinology : official journal of the Korean Rhinologic Society2025
Efficacy of Topical Manuka Honey for Chronic Rhinosinusitis After Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of rhinology : official journal of the Korean Rhinologic Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the efficacy of topical manuka honey in the postoperative management of chronic rhinosinusitis following endoscopic sinus surgery.
methodsA systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, OVID, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Data were extracted from the randomized trials identified for meta-analysis. Outcome measures-including visual analogue scales, quality of life assessed by the Sinonasal Outcome Test-22, the Philpott-Javer endoscopic score or Lund-Kennedy endoscopic score, post-treatment culture negativity, and adverse effects-were compared between the manuka honey treatment and control groups. Heterogeneity was assessed within subgroups.
resultsFour studies including 134 patients were incorporated into the meta-analysis. All subgroup analyses exhibited low heterogeneity. Visual analogue scale scores showed no significant differences, indicating that manuka honey did not cause definite discomfort (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.02 to 0.10). Similarly, improvement in the Sinonasal Outcome Test-22 score was not statistically significant (SMD, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.58 to 0.52). Although the Philpott-Javer score was slightly better in the manuka honey group, the difference was not statistically significant (SMD, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.26 to 0.52), and changes in the Lund-Kennedy endoscopic score from baseline were comparable (SMD, 0.59; 95% CI, -0.03 to 1.21). Culture negativity following manuka honey treatment was marginally improved compared to saline, yet without statistical significance (risk ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.16 to 1.15). No serious adverse effects were reported in any study.
conclusionAlthough topical manuka honey appears to have no serious adverse effects, its efficacy should be reconsidered given the lack of statistically significant improvement in sinus mucosal status and post-treatment culture negativity. Further well-designed trials are warranted to clarify its potential benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.