Relation between rhinosinusitis and bronchiectasis

The nose and lungs have both histological and functional similarities and differences. Sinonasal and bronchial involvement are associated in many diseases. Cystic fibrosis, primary ciliary dyskinesia, Young's syndrome, and alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency are diseases in which bronchiectasis and rhinosinusitis are both present. This review considers the diseases in which bronchiectasis occurs along with sinonasal manifestations. We propose examining sinonasal disease from a new perspective by observing it in patients with bronchiectasis.     

Incidencia y características de las agudizaciones asmáticas en Barcelona (ASMAB II)

Introduction

A study has been made on the incidence and clinical characteristics of asthma exacerbations (AE) seen in hospital emergency departments (HED) and domiciliary services (DS) in Barcelona.

Patients and methods

AEs were identified over a 56 day period during the months of October and November 2003 and the patients seen in university hospitals were interviewed.

Results

A total of 262 AE were identified, 188 in hospital emergency departments and 82 in domiciliary, which was a mean of 4.6 AE/day, giving an incidence of 0.37 AA/10⁵ inhabitants. This incidence was no different from that obtained in the same months in 2002 (P>0.05). The mean age (±standard deviation) of the143 cases of AE seen in university hospitals was 41±17 years; 87/143 (60%) were women and 57/138 (41%), smokers. In 36/61 (59%) the AE started in the home; in 88/132 (61%) it began 24 hours before arriving at the hospital centre. In 78/123 cases (63%) slow onset of nasal catarrh was noted before the AE and a viral infection was suspected. Inhaled corticoids were given to 45/112 patients (40%), and only one added oral corticoids 12 hours before admission. The AE were mild in 38/75 cases (51%), moderate in 28/75 (37%), severe in 8/75 (11%) and almost fatal in one patient (1.3%). Around 10% (13/137) of patients (10%) were re-admitted.

Conclusions

The daily incidence of AE is 0.37/10⁵ inhabitants. More than half of the exacerbations started after nasal catarrh and 11% of the AE were severe.     

Rupatadine 10 mg and ebastine 10 mg in seasonal allergic rhinitis: a comparison study

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to establish the efficacy and safety of rupatadine vs ebastine and placebo in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Rupatadine is a new second generation H(1)-antihistamine with once-daily dosing that may provide better control of symptoms than the currently used H(1)-receptor blockers because of its dual pharmacological profile (anti-PAF and anti-H(1)). METHODS: In a multicentre study, 250 patients with SAR were included in a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group and placebo-controlled study. Patients received either rupatadine 10 mg, ebastine 10 mg or placebo once daily for 2 weeks. The main efficacy outcome was based on the patient's record of severity of nasal symptoms (sneezing, nasal itching, runny nose and nasal obstruction) and nonnasal symptoms (conjunctival itching, tearing and pharyngeal itching). The daily total symptom score (DTSS) was the mean of the DSS recorded for each of the seven symptoms assessed, and the mean DTSS (mDTSS) was the mean of the DTSS values for each study day. RESULTS: Significant differences in mDTSS were detected between rupatadine and placebo (33% lower for rupatadine group; P = 0.005) after 2 weeks of treatment. The TSS for rupatadine were 22% lower than for ebastine, although the differences were not statistically significant. No serious adverse events were reported during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Rupatadine 10 mg once daily was clearly superior to placebo in alleviating the symptoms of SAR over a 2-week period. In comparison with ebastine, rupatadine shows a trend towards a better profile as regard several secondary efficacy variables.     

Intranasal challenge with aspirin in the diagnosis of aspirin intolerant asthma: evaluation of nasal response by acoustic rhinometry

BACKGROUND: Nasal provocation tests with lysine-aspirin have recently been introduced for assessment of aspirin intolerant asthma. A study was undertaken to evaluate the usefulness of acoustic rhinometry, a new non-invasive technique, in the diagnosis of aspirin intolerant asthma/rhinitis. METHODS: Fifteen patients with aspirin intolerant asthma/rhinitis (nine women, mean (SD) age 54.7 (14) years), eight patients with aspirin tolerant asthma/rhinitis (three women, mean (SD) age 52.6 (7.8) years), and eight healthy subjects (two women, mean (SD) age 32.5 (9.7) years) were studied. All subjects were challenged with saline (0.9% NaCl) and 25 mg lysine acetylsalicylic acid (L-ASA) instilled into each nostril of the nose on two separate days. The clinical response was evaluated based on nasal symptoms (sneezes, itching, secretion and blockage). The nasal response was measured by acoustic rhinometry. Symptoms and rhinometry curves were recorded at 10 minute intervals for three hours, one hour before challenge and two hours after challenge. RESULTS: L-ASA challenge induced a significant increase in symptoms in patients with aspirin intolerant asthma/rhinitis. No differences in the clinical response were detected in those with aspirin tolerant asthma/rhinitis or healthy subjects. L-ASA challenge induced a significant decrease in nasal volume measured by acoustic rhinometry in aspirin intolerant patients. No differences were detected between the challenges in aspirin tolerant patients. If a 25% decrease in nasal volume is taken as the cut off point, the specificity of the test was 94% and the sensitivity reached 73%. The nasal challenge was well tolerated by all subjects. CONCLUSION: Acoustic rhinometry may be used to study the nasal response to L-ASA. Nasal challenge with L-ASA is safe and can be used as a diagnostic test even in asthmatic patients with severe bronchial obstruction.