Loading…
The effect of saline solutions on nasal patency and mucociliary clearance in rhinosinusitis patients
To compare the effect of two saline nasal sprays on nasal patency and mucociliary clearance in patients with rhinosinusitis. Randomized double-blind trial. Eighty patients with rhinosinusitis at a tertiary care academic center had nasal patency and mucociliary clearance measured. Each patient was th...
Saved in:
Published in: | Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery 2007-11, Vol.137 (5), p.815-821 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | To compare the effect of two saline nasal sprays on nasal patency and mucociliary clearance in patients with rhinosinusitis.
Randomized double-blind trial.
Eighty patients with rhinosinusitis at a tertiary care academic center had nasal patency and mucociliary clearance measured. Each patient was then treated with either physiological or hypertonic saline. Nasal patency and mucociliary clearance measurements were repeated after treatment. Subjective evaluation was also performed.
Both solutions improved saccharine clearance times (
P < 0.0001). Buffered physiological saline significantly affected nasal airway patency (
P = 0.006). Both solutions improved symptoms of nasal stuffiness (
P < 0.0001) and nasal obstruction (
P < 0.0001). Buffered hypertonic saline caused increased nasal burning/irritation compared with buffered physiological saline (
P < 0.0001).
Buffered physiological and buffered hypertonic saline nasal sprays both improve mucociliary clearance, which is beneficial for treatment of rhinosinusitis. Additionally, buffered physiological saline improves nasal airway patency, whereas buffered hypertonic saline has no effect. Both solutions provide symptomatic relief, but buffered hypertonic saline is more irritating. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0194-5998 1097-6817 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.otohns.2007.07.034 |