5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Diagnosis and treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis: focus on intranasal Amphotericin B

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a chronic disease that affects 14.2% of the US adult population. Despite being widespread, little is known about the etiology of CRS. Treatment has been symptomatic and focused on relieving symptoms. Recent investigations into causes of CRS have revealed that most CRS patients have an eosinophilic infiltration of their nasal tissue (mucosa), regardless of atopy and elevated immunoglobulin E levels. Although fungi are ubiquitous and in the nasal mucus of both healthy people and patients, it is only in the patients that the eosinophils (part of the inflammatory response) are found. Fungi in the nasal mucus are harmless, yet in CRS patients these same fungi stimulate an inflammatory response, inducing the eosinophils to leave the blood vessels and enter the nasal and sinus tissue and ultimately enter the nasal airway mucus. In the nasal mucus these eosinophils attack the fungi and destroy the fungi by the release of a toxic substance called major basic protein (MBP) from the granules in the eosinophils. This degranulation and release of the toxic MBP not only destroys fungi, but also produces collateral damage injuring the nasal and sinus mucosal lining tissue. The injury to the mucosal lining makes the nasal and sinus mucosa susceptible to penetration and potential infection by bacteria. When this tissue inflammation and damage is persistent and prolonged we call it CRS. The diagnosis of CRS is based largely on symptomatic criteria, with anterior rhinoscopy or endoscopy, and, if there is any doubt about the diagnosis, computed tomography imaging is employed to confirm the presence of diseased sinus mucosa. Treatment of CRS, whether medical (intranasal corticosteroids, saline irrigations) or surgical, is aimed at decreasing inflammation and obstruction in the sinonasal passages. Antibiotics, although commonly used in CRS, should not be administered unless there is suspicion of an acute bacterial infection. The theory behind the fungal and eosinophilic etiology of CRS has led to use of an antifungal compound, intranasal Amphotericin B. In clinical studies, topical irrigation with Amphotericin B has been shown to be both a safe and effective treatment for CRS.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Rhinosinusitis: Establishing definitions for clinical research and patient care

          Background There is a need for more research on all forms of rhinosinusitis. Progress in this area has been hampered by a lack of consensus definitions and the limited number of published clinical trials. Objectives To develop consensus definitions for rhinosinusitis and outline strategies useful in clinical trials. Methods Five national societies, The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology; The American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy; The American Academy of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery; The American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology; and the American Rhinologic Society formed an expert panel from multiple disciplines. Over two days, the panel developed definitions for rhinosinusitis and outlined strategies for design of clinical trials. Results Committee members agreed to adopt the term “rhinosinusitis” and reached consensus on definitions and strategies for clinical research on acute presumed bacterial rhinosinusitis, chronic rhinosinusitis without polyposis, chronic rhinosinusitis with polyposis, and classic allergic fungal rhinosinusitis. Symptom and objective criteria, measures for monitoring research progress, and use of symptom scoring tools, quality-of-life instruments, radiologic studies, and rhinoscopic assessment were outlined for each condition. Conclusion The recommendations from this conference should improve accuracy of clinical diagnosis and serve as a starting point for design of rhinosinusitis clinical trials.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Adult chronic rhinosinusitis: definitions, diagnosis, epidemiology, and pathophysiology.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The diagnosis and incidence of allergic fungal sinusitis.

              To reevaluate the current criteria for diagnosing allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS) and determine the incidence of AFS in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). This prospective study evaluated the incidence of AFS in 210 consecutive patients with CRS with or without polyposis, of whom 101 were treated surgically. Collecting and culturing fungi from nasal mucus require special handling, and novel methods are described. Surgical specimen handling emphasizes histologic examination to visualize fungi and eosinophils in the mucin. The value of allergy testing in the diagnosis of AFS is examined. Fungal cultures of nasal secretions were positive in 202 (96%) of 210 consecutive CRS patients. Allergic mucin was found in 97 (96%) of 101 consecutive surgical cases of CRS. Allergic fungal sinusitis was diagnosed in 94 (93%) of 101 consecutive surgical cases with CRS, based on histopathologic findings and culture results. Immunoglobulin E-mediated hypersensitivity to fungal allergens was not evident in the majority of AFS patients. The data presented indicate that the diagnostic criteria for AFS are present in the majority of patients with CRS with or without polyposis. Since the presence of eosinophils in the allergic mucin, and not a type I hypersensitivity, is likely the common denominator in the pathophysiology of AFS, we propose a change in terminology from AFS to eosinophilic fungal rhinosinusitis.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
                Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
                Dove Medical Press
                1176-6336
                1178-203X
                June 2007
                June 2007
                : 3
                : 2
                : 319-325
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York NY, USA
                [2 ]Accentia Biopharmaceuticals New York, NY, USA
                [3 ]Analytica International New York, NY, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Angelos M Stergiou Accentia Biopharmaceuticals, 450 Park Avenue South, 12 th Floor, New York, NY 10016, USA Ph +1 212 686 4100 x8101 Fax +1 212 686 8601 Email astergiou@ 123456accentia.net
                Article
                1936313
                18360640
                © 2007 Dove Medical Press Limited. All rights reserved
                Categories
                Reviews

                Medicine

                rhinosinusitis, chronic sinusitis, amphotericin b, treatment, antifungal, diagnosis

                Comments

                Comment on this article