Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Intranasal steroids for acute sinusitis

Information

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005149.pub4Copy DOI
Database:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Version published:
  1. 02 December 2013see what's new
Type:
  1. Intervention
Stage:
  1. Review
Cochrane Editorial Group:
  1. Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2019 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Article metrics

Altmetric:

Cited by:

Cited 0 times via Crossref Cited-by Linking

Collapse

Authors

Contributions of authors

Dr Anca Zalmanovici wrote the review, searched the literature, selected the studies to be included, assessed their quality, entered the data into RevMan 2012, wrote the methods, results and discussion sections and updated the review.
Dr John Yaphe searched the literature, was an independent assessor in selecting trials to be included, assessed the quality of the trials, wrote the discussion section and edited the review.

Declarations of interest

None known.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group for ongoing assistance, especially Chanpen Choprapawon, Leonard Leibovici, Marilyn Oates, Richmal Oates‐Whitehead and Erik Schenkel for useful comments on the draft protocol. We wish to thank Chanpen Choprapawon, Eric Schenkel, Richard G. Shoemaker and Leonard Leibovici for the commenting on the draft review and Liz Dooley and Sarah Thorning for the suggested search strategy and support with the searches and updates. We also wish to thank Yusra Adel Badr, JM Klossek, Sree Nair and Nick Matheson for commenting on the 2009 updated draft and Clalit Health Services Tel‐Aviv district for supporting the activities of Anca Zalmanovici.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2013 Dec 02

Intranasal steroids for acute sinusitis

Review

Anca Zalmanovici Trestioreanu, John Yaphe

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005149.pub4

2009 Oct 07

Intranasal steroids for acute sinusitis

Review

Anca Zalmanovici Trestioreanu, John Yaphe

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005149.pub3

2009 Jul 08

Steroids for acute sinusitis

Review

Anca Zalmanovici, John Yaphe

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005149.pub2

2005 Jan 24

Steroids for acute sinusitis

Protocol

Anca Zalmanovici, John Yaphe

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005149

Notes

We thank Professor Leonard Leibovici from the Rabin Medical Center and Professor Michael A Weingarten, of the Department of Family Medicine, Tel‐Aviv University, for their useful suggestions and final revision of this review.

Keywords

MeSH

Medical Subject Headings Check Words

Adult; Child; Humans;

PICOs

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

The PICO model is widely used and taught in evidence-based health care as a strategy for formulating questions and search strategies and for characterizing clinical studies or meta-analyses. PICO stands for four different potential components of a clinical question: Patient, Population or Problem; Intervention; Comparison; Outcome.

See more on using PICO in the Cochrane Handbook.

'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with resolution of symptoms or improved (MFNS 400 µg daily).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants with resolution of symptoms or improved (MFNS 400 µg daily).

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 2 Proportion of participants with resolution of symptoms or improved (MFNS 200 µg daily).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 2 Proportion of participants with resolution of symptoms or improved (MFNS 200 µg daily).

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 3 Proportion of participants with resolution of symptoms or improved (combined MFNS 200, 400 and 800 µg daily).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 3 Proportion of participants with resolution of symptoms or improved (combined MFNS 200, 400 and 800 µg daily).

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 4 Number of participants that dropped out from the study (MFNS 400 µg daily).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 4 Number of participants that dropped out from the study (MFNS 400 µg daily).

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 5 Number of participants that dropped out from the study (MFNS 200 µg daily).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 5 Number of participants that dropped out from the study (MFNS 200 µg daily).

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 6 Number of participants that dropped out from the study (combined MFNS 200, 400 and 800 µg daily).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 6 Number of participants that dropped out from the study (combined MFNS 200, 400 and 800 µg daily).

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 7 Relapse (combined 200 and 400 µg daily).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo, Outcome 7 Relapse (combined 200 and 400 µg daily).

Table 1. Adverse events

Study

Intervention

Side effects

Comments

Dolor 2001

Fluticasone propionate 2 puffs ‐ total dose 200 µg or placebo nasal spray once daily in addition to 250 mg cefuroxime axetil orally twice daily and 2 puffs of xylometazoline hydrochloride twice daily

Headache, bloody nose, vaginal itching, yeast infection, nausea, stomach irritation, diarrhoea, increased congestion, hay fever, light‐headed, sore throat, thirsty, itching, rash, cough, fatigue, metallic taste, felt dried out, nasal tissue felt inflamed

No serious unexpected adverse events reported

Any adverse event ‐ 37% in the fluticasone group versus 20% in the placebo group (P value = 0.7) no statistical significant difference

Adverse events could be attributed also to the co‐treatment

Nayak 2002

Amoxicillin‐clavulanate potassium 875 mg
twice daily orally and MFNS 200, 400 µg or placebo nasal spray twice daily

Epistaxis was the most frequently reported adverse event
Nasal burning, irritation and headache occurred in less than 2% of any treatment group

Treatment well‐tolerated, adverse events similar for all 3 arms of mild/moderate intensity: 12%, 15%, 15% in the MFNS 400, 800 µg and placebo arms

50 patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events, most commonly diarrhoea and nausea due to the antibiotic and were equally distributed among groups. Epistaxis, nasal burning, irritation or infection were not a cause for discontinuation of treatment

Barlan 1997

Budesonide 50 µg or placebo nasal spray to each nostril bid in addition to amoxicillin clavulanate potassium 40 mg/kg/day tid

Rash after 1 week attributed to the antibiotic in 1 subject that was switched to cefaclor

No specific adverse events related to the INCS use were reported

Meltzer 2005

MFNS 200 µg once daily or twice daily nasal spray
Amoxicillin 500 mg tid
Placebo nasal spray and capsules

Headache and epistaxis were most common reported

Most adverse events were mild or moderate with a similar incidence among treatment groups: 36.2%,
35.4%, 33.5% and 38.1% with MFNS 200 µg, 400 µg,
amoxicillin and placebo
1%, 3%, 2% and 2% of participants discontinued treatment because of adverse events in the 200 µg, 400 µg INCS, antibiotic and placebo arms

bid: twice daily
INCS: intranasal corticosteroid
MFNS: mometasone furoate
tid: three times daily

Figures and Tables -
Table 1. Adverse events
Comparison 1. Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Proportion of participants with resolution of symptoms or improved (MFNS 400 µg daily) Show forest plot

2

1130

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.10 [1.02, 1.18]

2 Proportion of participants with resolution of symptoms or improved (MFNS 200 µg daily) Show forest plot

2

590

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.04 [0.98, 1.11]

3 Proportion of participants with resolution of symptoms or improved (combined MFNS 200, 400 and 800 µg daily) Show forest plot

3

1792

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.11 [1.04, 1.18]

4 Number of participants that dropped out from the study (MFNS 400 µg daily) Show forest plot

2

1130

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.86 [0.61, 1.20]

5 Number of participants that dropped out from the study (MFNS 200 µg daily) Show forest plot

2

590

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.46, 1.21]

6 Number of participants that dropped out from the study (combined MFNS 200, 400 and 800 µg daily) Show forest plot

3

1792

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.85 [0.64, 1.12]

7 Relapse (combined 200 and 400 µg daily) Show forest plot

2

825

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.44, 1.15]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo