ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Part II - imidazolines and rhinitis medicamentosa: how can we tackle the rebound dilemma?
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rhinitis medicamentosa is the state of chronic congestion experienced from the prolonged or excessive use of nasal vasoconstrictors, typically used in the treatment of nasal congestion. Although a minor ailment, nasal congestion is a bothersome symptom for many allergic and non-allergic rhinitis sufferers. To alleviate symptoms, patients turn to over-the-counter topical nasal decongestants, with imidazolines often being the active ingredient of choice, as they provide rapid and long-lasting symptom relief, via vasoconstriction within the nasal mucosa. When used correctly, nasal vasoconstrictors are considered safe. However, misuse and deviation away from the recommended frequency of dose or maximum length of treatment can result initially in acute rebound congestion and if continued, rhinitis medicamentosa (RM). The pathophysiology and mechanisms of RM have not been fully elucidated and are complicated by difficulties in determining where the underlying disease ends, and RM begins. RM is characterised by the presence of chronic nasal congestion which responds less effectively and for progressively shorter periods to nasal vasoconstrictor treatments. Consequently, patients try to relieve symptoms by taking the nasal vasoconstrictor more frequently or at higher doses, which ultimately exacerbates the congestion further and creates a dependency on the nasal vasoconstrictor. Why RM develops is unclear, hypothesised mechanisms include structural, functional and inflammatory changes in the nasal mucosa, changes in receptor sensitivity or innervation pathways. To which extent this is solely in response to the use of imidazoline derivates or related to the presence of preservatives in topical nasal treatments is yet to be determined. Although treatment options exist for RM, prevention may be the best medicine. Provision of better education around the use of nasal vasoconstrictions, coupled with preservative free formulations and lowest possible dose delivery, may help to reduce the likelihood of developing the disease from the outset, reducing the burden on both the patient and healthcare providers.
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.