Reychler Gregory, Colbrant Coralie, Huart Caroline, Le Guellec Sandrine, Vecellio Laurent, Liistro Giuseppe, Rombaux Philippe
Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Pôle de Pneumologie, ORL & Dermatologie, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium; Service de Pneumologie, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.
Laryngoscope. 2015 Mar;125(3):549-55. doi: 10.1002/lary.24937. Epub 2014 Sep 16.
Olfactory dysfunction is deemed to be a significant contributor to poor quality of life in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).
To assess and to compare the effectiveness of three modalities of corticosteroids administration in patients with CRS.
A prospective randomized controlled study
Thirty patients with CRS were randomized in three groups depending on the route of corticosteroids administration: 16 days by oral route (Medrol (Pfizer, Belgique), 32 mg/8 days -16 mg/4 days-8 mg/4 days); nasal spray (Rhinocort (AstraZeneca, Belgique), 2 × 2 × 64 µg/nostril); or sonic nebulization (Pulmicort (AstraZeneca, Belgique), 2 × 1 mg/4 mL) (Sonic nebulizer, AOHBOX-NL11SN, DTF, France). Olfactory function was assessed using orthonasal threshold discrimination identification and retronasal psychophysical olfactory tests (RNT) before and after the treatment. Same intranasal modalities were previously tested for in vitro airways scintigraphic deposition.
In vitro differences in drug deposition pattern between both intranasal modalities were demonstrated. Threshold discrimination identification and RNT were similar between three groups at baseline. Threshold discrimination identification improved by 5.5, 5.8, and -1.1 for sonic nebulization, oral, and nasal spray groups, respectively (P = 0.010). This improvement was clinically relevant for oral and nebulized administration. It was similar between oral and nebulized administration but significantly higher than nasal spray administration. Retronasal psychophysical olfactory tests improved similarly for the three groups (P = 0.231) CONCLUSION: Effectiveness of sonic nebulized and oral administration is demonstrated on orthonasal olfactory. The clinical benefit is better than with nasal spray.
嗅觉功能障碍被认为是慢性鼻-鼻窦炎(CRS)患者生活质量低下的一个重要因素。
评估并比较三种皮质类固醇给药方式对CRS患者的疗效。
一项前瞻性随机对照研究
30例CRS患者根据皮质类固醇给药途径随机分为三组:口服16天(美卓乐(辉瑞,比利时),32mg/8天 - 16mg/4天 - 8mg/4天);鼻喷雾剂(雷诺考特(阿斯利康,比利时),每侧鼻孔2×2×64μg);或超声雾化(普米克(阿斯利康,比利时),2×1mg/4mL)(超声雾化器,AOHBOX-NL11SN,DTF,法国)。治疗前后使用经鼻阈值辨别识别和鼻后心理物理嗅觉测试(RNT)评估嗅觉功能。之前已对相同的鼻内给药方式进行了体外气道闪烁显像沉积测试。
两种鼻内给药方式之间的药物沉积模式存在体外差异。三组在基线时的阈值辨别识别和RNT相似。超声雾化组、口服组和鼻喷雾剂组的阈值辨别识别分别提高了5.5、5.8和 - 1.1(P = 0.010)。这种改善在口服和雾化给药方面具有临床意义。口服和雾化给药之间相似,但显著高于鼻喷雾剂给药。三组的鼻后心理物理嗅觉测试改善情况相似(P = 0.231)
超声雾化和口服给药对经鼻嗅觉有疗效。临床益处优于鼻喷雾剂。