Search

ObjectivePreliminary data have demonstrated long-term efficacy of posterior nasal nerve (PNN) cryoablation in reducing rhinitis symptoms for patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). We sought to evaluate the impact of procedural cryoablation of the PNN on quality of life (QOL) in patients with AR and NAR.MethodsAdult patients undergoing PNN cryoablation for AR or NAR after appropriate medical therapy were included for analysis. Demographics, medical therapies, baseline rhinitis symptom (total nasal symptom score [TNSS]), and disease-specific QOL (mini-rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire [mini-RQLQ]) were recorded. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to test for significant changes in baseline test scores posttreatment. Absolute and relative improvement in outcomes was determined for each participant. Secondary outcomes were assessed with univariate and multivariate analyses.ResultsFourteen patients were enrolled with a mean follow-up of 16.5 weeks. The TNSS and mini-RQLQ scores significantly improved after PNN cryoablation (median δs [interquartile range]: -4 [3] and -1.61 [1.08], respectively; both P = .0002). The minimal clinically important difference for the TNSS and mini-RQLQ was obtained in 92.9% of patients in each category. Relative mean percentage (%) improvement after PNN cryoablation in the TNSS and mini-RQLQ was 40.7% and 40.5% (standard deviation = 24.9 and 29.5, respectively), respectively, for all patients. Patients with NAR (n = 10) reported mean improvement of 41.3% (29.1) as measured by the TNSS and 49.6% (25.9) by mini-RQLQ. Patients with AR reported mean percentage improvement in TNSS and mini-RQLQ scores of 39.5% (12.1) and 24.6% (28.5), respectively. Patients who had been prescribed a nasal anticholinergic for management prior to PNN cryoablation had statistically significantly increased improvement in mini-RQLQ scores from pre- to post-procedure (P = .0387).ConclusionSurgical cryoablation of the PNN significantly improves both symptoms and disease-specific QOL in majority of patients with AR and NAR.

Objective: This study aims to compare the effectiveness of intranasal ipratropium bromide (INIB) to a placebo in reducing nasal symptoms, particularly rhinorrhea, and enhancing quality of life in non‐allergic rhinitis (NAR) patients. Study Design: Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted on Medline, Embase, and Cochrane libraries. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non‐randomized comparative parallel group trials comparing IB nasal spray to placebo were included. Results: Five RCTs assessed a total of 472 participants with a diagnosis of NAR. IB nasal spray 0.03% were used across all studies. IB has a better impact on decreasing rhinorrhea than the placebo, with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of 0.93 (95% CI 0.06–1.8). The mean change in rhinorrhea severity was 85% (95% CI 77–92%) and I^2 26% (p = 0.24). IB outperformed the placebo in terms of shortening the symptom's duration/day, as shown by an SMD of 0.35 (95% CI 0.15–0.55). The difference between treatments was noticeable within the first week and remained consistent throughout the treatment. Patients who were administered IB experienced a substantially greater improvement in physical and mental outcomes. Nasal adverse events with IB were generally intermittent and brief. Conclusion: Compared with a placebo, IB nasal spray is both safe and effective in treating the rhinorrhea associated with NAR. IB significantly reduces the severity and duration of rhinorrhea. The treatment was determined to be beneficial by both patients and physicians and resulted in a better quality of life. Level of Evidence: 1 Laryngoscope, 133:3247–3255, 2023 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: Autonomic nerve densities were equivalent in posterior nasal (PNN), posterolateral nasal (PLNN), and anterior ethmoid nerves (AEN).Rhinitis studies should explore the utility of PLNN and/or AEN transection over PNN alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Preliminary data have demonstrated long-term efficacy of posterior nasal nerve (PNN) cryoablation in reducing rhinitis symptoms for patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). We sought to evaluate the impact of procedural cryoablation of the PNN on quality of life (QOL) in patients with AR and NAR. Methods: Adult patients undergoing PNN cryoablation for AR or NAR after appropriate medical therapy were included for analysis. Demographics, medical therapies, baseline rhinitis symptom (total nasal symptom score [TNSS]), and disease-specific QOL (mini-rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire [mini-RQLQ]) were recorded. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to test for significant changes in baseline test scores posttreatment. Absolute and relative improvement in outcomes was determined for each participant. Secondary outcomes were assessed with univariate and multivariate analyses. Results: Fourteen patients were enrolled with a mean follow-up of 16.5 weeks. The TNSS and mini-RQLQ scores significantly improved after PNN cryoablation (median δs [interquartile range]: −4 [3] and −1.61 [1.08], respectively; both P =.0002). The minimal clinically important difference for the TNSS and mini-RQLQ was obtained in 92.9% of patients in each category. Relative mean percentage (%) improvement after PNN cryoablation in the TNSS and mini-RQLQ was 40.7% and 40.5% (standard deviation = 24.9 and 29.5, respectively), respectively, for all patients. Patients with NAR (n = 10) reported mean improvement of 41.3% (29.1) as measured by the TNSS and 49.6% (25.9) by mini-RQLQ. Patients with AR reported mean percentage improvement in TNSS and mini-RQLQ scores of 39.5% (12.1) and 24.6% (28.5), respectively. Patients who had been prescribed a nasal anticholinergic for management prior to PNN cryoablation had statistically significantly increased improvement in mini-RQLQ scores from pre- to post-procedure (P =.0387). Conclusion: Surgical cryoablation of the PNN significantly improves both symptoms and disease-specific QOL in majority of patients with AR and NAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Objective Kinetic oscillation stimulation (KOS) is a new treatment method for nonallergic rhinitis (NAR), usually delivered twice with a 2‐ to 4‐week interval, and thought to stabilize autonomous dysregulation in the nasal mucosa. We aimed to assess the long‐term (1 year) results following one KOS treatment amongst patients with NAR. Methods KOS was administered through a latex balloon placed in the patient's nasal cavity. The balloon is connected to a device that fills the balloon with air pulses, thus vibrating the balloon for 10 min per side. Outcomes were evaluated through patient‐reported outcome measures (Sino‐Nasal Outcome Test 22 [SNOT‐22], Total Nasal Symptom Score [TNSS], Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation [NOSE], and 15D) and measures of patency (rhinomanometry, acoustic rhinometry, peak nasal inspiratory flow [PNIF], and clinical inferior turbinate size). Pre‐treatment actions were repeated at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Results In all 49 patients, we found significant improvement in the SNOT‐22, NOSE, and TNSS scores. At 12 months, SNOT‐22 improved from 44 to 34, NOSE from 60 to 45, TNSS from 8 to 7, and PNIF from 80 to 100 L/min (p

Abstract Objective To determine the efficacy of posterior nasal nerve (PNN) cryoablation for improving the symptoms of chronic rhinitis. Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting A private practice. Methods This study evaluated medication usage and adverse effects of in‐office PNN cryoablation with a handheld device in patients > 18 years with chronic (>6 months) allergic or nonallergic rhinitis for whom medical management failed. The total nasal symptom score (TNSS) and mini rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (mRQLQ) scores were compared before and after treatment. Results This study included 127 patients with a mean age of 52.4 ± 16.9 years; 60.6% of patients were female and 49.6% had allergic rhinitis. Mean symptom scores decreased from 5.94 (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.51‐6.43) to 3.44 (95% CI, 2.97‐3.81, P

Background: ClariFix for posterior nasal nerve ablation has been approved for use since 2017, and this is the first study attempting to synthesize and assess the efficacy of this new device on the management of chronic rhinitis. Objective: The primary objective of this meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy of ClariFix in the symptomatic management of patients with chronic rhinitis. The main outcome measure is the mean difference in the reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS). Methods: A systematic search of Pubmed/Medline, Web of Science, and EBSCOhost was conducted from inception to May 2022. Peer-reviewed clinical trials reporting postcryotherapy rTNSS at both 1- and 3-month intervals for patients with chronic rhinitis were included. A random-effects model was utilized for meta-analysis. Study heterogeneity, bias, and overall quality were all assessed. The authors followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. The primary outcome measures included mean differences in rTNSS from baseline to both 1- and 3-month postoperative time points. Secondary measures included other questionnaires including the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ). Results: There were 5 studies that met the criteria (247 individuals). The pooled rTNSS mean difference from baseline to 1 and 3 months postoperatively was found to be −3.48 points (95% CI: −3.73 to −3.23, I 2 = 0.13). and −3.50 (95% CI: −3.71 to −3.29, I 2 = 0.00), respectively. The mean difference from baseline to 3 months postoperatively regarding the RQLQ was found to be −1.53 (95% CI: −1.74 to −1.31, I 2 = 0.00). The most common adverse effects included facial or surgical site pain (40.4%), followed by headache (18.2%), oral numbness (11.1%), and sinusitis (4.0%). Conclusions: The findings of this systematic review suggest that cryoablation with Clarifix is an effective treatment modality for chronic rhinitis. However, higher-quality randomized controlled trials will need to be performed to affirm the findings of this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: nonallergic rhinitis; pollution; particular matter EN nonallergic rhinitis pollution particular matter 1042 1045 4 05/29/23 20230601 NES 230601 INTRODUCTION Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) has an estimated prevalence of 200 million worldwide and is a broad classification defined by the presence of rhinitis symptomatology without evidence of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) or immunoglobulin E-mediated allergic disease. Although several studies have demonstrated an association between PM SB 2.5 sb and sinonasal inflammation and upper respiratory disease, the pathophysiology linking NAR and PM SB 2.5 sb remains unclear. Long-term particulate matter exposure is associated with the development of nonallergic rhinitis: A case-control study. [Extracted from the article]

Background: The escalating negative impact of climate change on our environment has the potential to result in significant morbidity of rhinologic diseases. Methods: Evidence based review of examples of rhinologic diseases including allergic and nonallergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis was performed. Results: The lower socioeconomic population, including historically oppressed groups, will be disproportionately affected. Conclusions: We need a systematic approach to improve healthcare database infrastructure and funding to promote diverse scientific collaboration to address these healthcare needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Yanran Huang,1– 3,* Yuan Zhang,1– 3,* Jiajia Wang,4,5 Xiaobo Li,4,5 Chengshuo Wang,1,2 Rui Chen,4,5 Luo Zhang1– 3 1Department of Allergy, Beijing TongRen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Beijing TongRen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People’s Republic of China; 3Beijing Key Laboratory of Nasal Diseases, Beijing Institute of Otolaryngology, Beijing, People’s Republic of China; 4Beijing Key Laboratory of Environmental Toxicology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People’s Republic of China; 5School of Public Health, Advanced Innovation Center for Human Brain Protection, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People’s Republic of China*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Luo Zhang, Beijing Key Laboratory of Nasal Diseases, Beijing Institute of Otolaryngology, No. 17, HouGouHuTong, DongCheng District, Beijing, 100005, People’s Republic of China, Email dr.luozhang@139.com Rui Chen, Beijing Key Laboratory of Environmental Toxicology, Capital Medical University, 10 Xitoutiao, You’anmen, Fengtai District, Beijing, 100069, People’s Republic of China, Email ruichen@ccmu.edu.cnBackground: Rhino-conjunctivitis symptoms are more severe in nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) patients during pollen season than in other seasons. Little is known about the role of pollen and air pollutants on the severity of NAR.Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the cross-sectional effects of both pollen and air pollutants on NAR patients during the pollen and non-pollen seasons, and to further explore the possible relationship among these triggers.Methods: A total of 2411 clinically diagnosed NAR outpatients from 2018 to 2019 were recruited for this study. The severity of NAR was measured using rhinoconjunctivitis symptom scores. Associations of daily exposure to pollen, PM2.5, PM10, NO2, SO2, CO, O3, and rhinoconjunctivitis symptom scores were evaluated using Logistic regression models. Distributed Lag Nonlinear models were used to explore single-day and accumulative Lag effects of environmental factors mentioned above.Results: During the pollen season, pollen concentration, higher exposure levels of PM10, PM2.5, NO2, and SO2 increased the severity of NAR group when compared with the low-moderate severity group. The high severity group was associated with lower exposure levels of O3. However, during non-pollen seasons, no significant association was found in air pollutant metrics, pollen concentration, and severity of NAR. The exposure-severity effects of pollen were different when different ambient pollutants were stratified.Conclusion: Synergistic effect of pollen and air pollutants, including PM2.5, PM10, SO2, NO2, and O3, might be responsible for aggravating the symptoms of NAR patients during pollen seasons.Keywords: air pollution, pollen, nonallergic rhinitis

Objective: Kinetic oscillation stimulation (KOS) is a new treatment method for nonallergic rhinitis (NAR), usually delivered twice with a 2‐ to 4‐week interval, and thought to stabilize autonomous dysregulation in the nasal mucosa. We aimed to assess the long‐term (1 year) results following one KOS treatment amongst patients with NAR. Methods: KOS was administered through a latex balloon placed in the patient's nasal cavity. The balloon is connected to a device that fills the balloon with air pulses, thus vibrating the balloon for 10 min per side. Outcomes were evaluated through patient‐reported outcome measures (Sino‐Nasal Outcome Test 22 [SNOT‐22], Total Nasal Symptom Score [TNSS], Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation [NOSE], and 15D) and measures of patency (rhinomanometry, acoustic rhinometry, peak nasal inspiratory flow [PNIF], and clinical inferior turbinate size). Pre‐treatment actions were repeated at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: In all 49 patients, we found significant improvement in the SNOT‐22, NOSE, and TNSS scores. At 12 months, SNOT‐22 improved from 44 to 34, NOSE from 60 to 45, TNSS from 8 to 7, and PNIF from 80 to 100 L/min (p <.005 for all). We observed no major complications. Conclusion: One KOS treatment appears to provide NAR patients with a subjective symptom improvement for at least 1 year, thus possibly decreasing the need for invasive treatment methods. Level of Evidence: III. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) often are comorbid with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Finding a convenient test that distinguishes these complex conditions is helpful for effective treatment. We aimed to analyse blood parameter differences between AR and NAR patients with/without CRS. Methods: Eight hundred thirteen patients, including AR and NAR with different conditions [CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP)] were analysed in this retrospective study. Patients with a nasal deviation alone were included as healthy controls (HC). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to assess the value of blood parameters for diagnosing AR or NAR with/without CRS. Results: Compared to nonallergic‐like rhinitis (HC, CRSwNP and CRSsNP), the blood eosinophil count was significantly increased in the allergic‐like rhinitis groups, except for NAR‐CRSsNP (AR, AR‐CRSwNP, AR‐CRSsNP, NAR and NAR‐CRSwNP). The NAR‐CRSsNP group had a higher level of eosinophils than the HC and CRSsNP groups. Among allergic‐like rhinitis patients, eosinophils were higher in allergic‐like rhinitis patients with CRSwNP (AR‐CRSwNP and NAR‐CRSwNP) than in allergic‐like rhinitis patients without CRSwNP (AR, AR‐CRSsNP, NAR and NAR‐CRSsNP). However, no difference in blood eosinophils was observed between AR and NAR. There was also no difference among nonallergic‐like rhinitis patients. Similar findings were found for the blood eosinophil proportion. Furthermore, the blood eosinophil count was a good predictor of allergic‐like rhinitis, especially allergic‐like rhinitis with CRSwNP. Conclusion: The blood eosinophil count and proportion may be good diagnostic predictors of allergic‐like rhinitis but cannot differentiate between AR and NAR. This indicator may be much better in predicting allergic‐like rhinitis with CRSwNP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is, to date, a debated and complex entity, still orphan of global consideration and a multicentric approach. LAR does not seem to find a proper positioning in the classic classifications and phenotypes of chronic rhinitis, and its pathophysiology relies specifically on the presence of local IgE. These patients in fact have a suggestive clinical history of allergic rhinitis in the presence of negative skin prick tests and serum IgE tests for the suspect allergen. Nasal allergen challenge, assessment of local IgE, basophil activation test (BAT), and nasal cytology are, at the moment, the most used tests in the diagnostic approach to the disease, despite their limitations. Considering that the correct interpretation of diagnostic tests and their clinical relevance is fundamental in the assessment of the right diagnosis and the subsequent therapy, we propose a new diagnostic approach that encompasses all of these methodologies and suggest that several pragmatic randomized control trials as well as prospective, multicentric studies directed at the long-term follow-up of LAR be carried out to further investigate this debated entity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is characterized by rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, and sneezing, in the absence of systemic sensitization to allergens. For cases refractory to medical therapy and conservative surgical interventions, more targeted procedures, such as endoscopic vidian neurectomy (EVN) and posterior nasal neurectomy (PNN), including surgical (SPNN) and cryoablative (CPNN) methods, may reduce symptoms of NAR. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy, side effect profile, and complication rate between EVN and PNN for NAR. Methods: A systematic review of primary articles that reported original patient data for either EVN or PNN was conducted using Embase, Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane databases since 2006, according to PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcome of the study was an improvement in NAR symptom severity. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of postoperative side effects or complications. Results: In total, 58 articles met the search criteria with a total of 9 studies (including 2 RCTs) eligible for inclusion. There was a pooled sample of 229 NAR patients that underwent EVN (n = 65; 28.4%), SPNN (n = 50; 21.8%), or CPNN (n = 114; 49.8%). For all 3 techniques, there was a statistically significant improvement in nasal symptoms, particularly rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, and obstruction along with quality of life. Heterogeneity in outcome reporting prevented meta-analysis and direct comparison of efficacy. The pooled incidence of postoperative complications for EVN (n = 65), SPNN (n = 50), and CPNN (n = 70) was 30.8% versus 0% versus 2.9% for dry eye, 16.9% versus 0% versus 1.4% for palatal/cheek numbness, and 0% versus 6% versus 4.3% for bleeding. Conclusion: EVN, SPNN, and CPNN are similarly efficacious for patients with NAR refractory to medical management. SPNN and CPNN are associated with lower rates of complications (dry eye and palatal/cheek numbness) compared with EVN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are valuable in the assessment and management of rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). They measure outcomes that may include symptoms, disease control, well-being, and health-related quality of life (QOL). PROMs for rhinitis and rhinosinusitis are often used before and after an intervention, for example, medication, therapeutic procedure, or, in allergic rhinitis (AR), allergen immunotherapy. Although widely used in clinical trials for AR and conjunctivitis, symptom score PROMs are less validated than disease control or QOL measures. The best validated PROM for AR is the Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire, but there is no universally accepted criterion standard for symptom and disease control PROMs. For CRS, at least 15 different criteria have been used to assess disease control in clinical studies, but what CRS disease control means and how it should be measured are concepts in evolution. The most used QOL measure for CRS is the 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test. The use of PROMs to support clinical decisions and for shared decision-making for rhinitis and rhinosinusitis still has many challenges, including the selection of the preferred instrument, when and how to administer, the impact of comorbidities, and questionnaire fatigue for both patient and provider., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Rhinitis is among the most common respiratory diseases in children. Nonallergic rhinitis, which involves nasal symptoms without evidence of systemic allergic inflammation or infection, is a heterogeneous entity with diverse manifestations and intensities. Nonallergic rhinitis accounts for 16%–89% of the chronic rhinitis cases, affecting 1%–50% (median 10%) of the total pediatric population. The clinical course of nonallergic rhinitis is generally rather mild and less likely to be associated with allergic comorbidities than allergic rhinitis. Here, we aimed to estimate the rate of coexisting comorbidities of nonallergic rhinitis. Nonallergic rhinitis is more prevalent during the first 2 years of life; however, its underestimation for children with atopic tendencies is likely due to low positive rates of specific allergic tests during early childhood. Local allergic rhinitis is a recently noted phenotype with rates similar to those in adults (median, 44%; range, 4%–67%), among patients previously diagnosed with nonallergic rhinitis. Idiopathic rhinitis, a subtype of nonallergic rhinitis, has been poorly studied in children, and its rates are known to be lower than those in adults. The prevalence of nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome is even lower. A correlation between nonallergic rhinitis and pollution has been suggested owing to the recent increase in nonallergic rhinitis rates in highly developing regions such as some Asian countries, but many aspects remain unknown. Conventional treatments include antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids, and recent treatments include combination of intranasal corticosteroids with azelastin or decongestants. Here we review the prevalence, diagnosis, comorbidities, and treatment recommendations for nonallergic rhinitis versus allergic rhinitis in children.

Background: Leptin may play a critical role in airway inflammation. However, it has rarely been evaluated in rhinitis with different aetiology. This study aimed to compare the serum leptin levels between allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). Methods: Patients with chronic rhinitis were classified due to skin prick (ALK‐Abello/Madrid) and/or serum‐specific immunoglobulin E tests (UniCAP 100‐Pharmacia), against to aeroallergens if concordant with symptoms. Results: A total of 398 patients with a mean age of 29.03 years were recruited and grouped as AR and NAR. Mean serum leptin levels were similar in patients with NAR and AR, as well as in patients with and without asthma, but were significantly higher in females than males in both groups. Also, leptin levels were significantly higher in obese than nonobese patients in AR. In correlation analysis, leptin levels were found to be correlated with female gender, older age, and high body mass index (BMI) in the whole group. Despite the higher total nasal symptom score (TNSS) in patients with AR compared with NAR, there was no association of leptin levels with TNSS, severity and seasonality of symptoms, and allergen sensitization. In logistic regression analysis, younger age and high serum leptin levels were found to be independent predictors for the diagnosis of AR. Conclusions: We conclude that female patients with high BMI are more prone to AR probably due to immunological effects of adipose tissue, in addition to hormonal factors. This study showed that leptin measurement has limited value as a sole diagnostic tool to differentiate AR and NAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic nonallergic rhinitis syndromes encompass various conditions, of which vasomotor rhinitis is the most common form, representing approximately 80% of patients, also referred to as nonallergic rhinopathy (NAR), nasal hyperreactivity, neurogenic rhinitis, or idiopathic rhinitis. Expert panels have recommended replacing vasomotor rhinitis terminology because it is more descriptive of this condition that is characterized by symptoms triggered by chemical irritants and weather changes through chemosensors, mechanosensors, thermosensors, and/or osmosensors activated through different transient receptor potential calcium ion channels. Elucidating the specific role of transient receptor potential vanilloid 1, triggered by capsaicin, has been an important advancement in better understanding the pathophysiology of NAR because it has now been shown that downregulation of transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 receptors by several therapeutic compounds provides symptomatic relief for this condition. The classification of NAR is further complicated by its association with allergic rhinitis referred to as mixed rhinitis, which involves both immunoglobulin E-mediated and neurogenic mechanistic pathways. Comorbidities associated with NAR, including rhinosinusitis, headaches, asthma, chronic cough, and sleep disturbances, underscore the need for comprehensive management. Treatment options for NAR include environmental interventions, pharmacotherapy, and in refractory cases, surgical options, emphasizing the need for a tailored approach for each patient. Thus, it is extremely important to accurately diagnose NAR because inappropriate therapies lead to poor clinical outcomes and unnecessary health care and economic burdens for these patients. This review provides a comprehensive overview of NAR subtypes, focusing on classification, diagnosis, and treatment approaches for NAR., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Social determinants of health (SDHs) have a substantial impact on patient care and outcomes globally, both in low- to middle-income countries and in high-income countries. In the clinic, lack of availability of diagnostic tools, inequities in access to care, and challenges obtaining and adhering to prescribed treatment plans may further compound these issues. This article addresses a case of rhinitis in the context of SDHs and inequities in care that may affect various communities and populations around the world. SDHs may include various aspects of one's financial means, education, access to medical care, environment and living situation, and community factors, each of which could play a role in the rhinitis disease manifestations, diagnosis, and management. Allergic and nonallergic rhinitis are considered from this perspective. Rhinitis epidemiology, disease burden, and risk factors are broadly addressed. Patient evaluation, diagnostic tests, and management options are also reviewed, and issues related to SDHs are noted. Finally, inequities in care, knowledge gaps, and unmet needs are highlighted. It is critical to consider SDHs and care inequities when evaluating and treating patients for rhinitis and other allergic conditions., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Evidence is mounting that climate change is having a significant impact on exacerbations of rhinitis. Concomitantly, the prevalence of allergic rhinitis is increasing at an accelerated rate. We herein explore the impact of carbon dioxide, barometric pressure and humidity changes, and anthropogenic pollutants on aeroallergens and rhinitis hypersensitivity. Important immune mechanisms underlying the climate-driven effects on rhinitis are discussed. Also, climate change is shifting ecological zones and seasons, increasing weather extremes, and altering regional atmospheric and environmental conditions. The direct impact of these factors on promoting allergic and nonallergic rhinitis is reviewed., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives/Hypothesis: To assess the long‐term (12–24 months) safety and effectiveness of cryoablation of the posterior nasal nerve as treatment for chronic rhinitis. Study Design: A multicenter, prospective, single‐arm clinical study. Methods: The study was conducted from February 2017 to April 2020. Study endpoints included change from baseline in the reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS), Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), physician assessment of improvement using the Clinical Global Impression–Improvement (CGI–I), and the incidence of treatment‐related adverse events. Results: Ninety‐one participants completed the study through the initial 12‐month study period. Sixty‐two participants consented to the long‐term follow‐up with 57 completing the 24‐month follow‐up. Significant improvements in the total rTNSS were reflected in a median change from baseline of −3.0 or −4.0 at all timepoints (P <.001). Greater than 80.0% of participants achieved the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of improvement by ≥1 point on the rTNSS at all follow‐ups. Total RQLQ scores indicated significant improvement (P <.0001) in quality of life. Over 77% of participants achieved the MCID (≥0.5 points) for the total RQLQ score. According to the CGI–I, ≥83.0% experienced improvement at all but the 12‐month visit (61.9%). One participant experienced two treatment‐related serious adverse events (epistaxis and retained pledget). A total of 29 nonserious treatment‐related AEs were reported in 23 participants; most events were transient and resolved with little to no intervention. Conclusions: Cryotherapy significantly and clinically improves rhinitis symptoms and quality of life with outcomes that are durable through 24 months after treatment. Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:1952–1957, 2021 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Most epidemiologic studies reporting prevalence of allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) have assessed solely self-reported prevalence, without confirmation by objective measures. Furthermore, reports of prevalence of NAR in Chinese subjects are scarce. Thus, we aimed to explore the prevalence and risk factors of AR and NAR in a Chinese, based on both clinical manifestation and allergic status. Methods We conducted a population-based cross-sectional survey, involving 1084 local residents from a rural area of Beijing, China. Participants were enrolled using a stratified two-stage cluster sampling method. All adult participants or the guardians of children completed standardized questionnaires to provide relevant demographic and clinical information. Skin prick tests were also performed to determine sensitization to specific aeroallergens. AR/NAR was classified according to Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma criteria. Results Prevalence of self-reported AR was 46.80%. Based on SPT results, the confirmed standardized prevalence of AR and NAR were 16.78% and 24.60%, respectively. Severity scores for nasal itching, sneezing, rhinorrhea and congestion were significantly higher in subjects with AR, than subjects with NAR (P

Background: It is difficult to discriminate allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) in clinical practice due to the similar clinical manifestations. The study was to assess both the demographical and clinical features of AR and NAR in the real-world data of outpatients in China. Methods: It was a cross-sectional real-world study. AR and NAR were defined based on both subjective symptoms and objective specific serum IgE test. General demographic characteristics as well as clinical information were documented. Patients were further classified according the seasons of initial visiting hospital (during pollen seasons or not). A scoring system presented as nomograms for presence of AR was performed. Results: In the pollen season group, age distribution, the duration of rhinitis, comorbidity of asthma, food allergies, and score of coughing were found significantly associated with AR. Additionally, in the non-pollen season group, we found that ethnicity, age distributions, duration of rhinitis, comorbidity of asthma, food allergies, and family history of allergy, together with scores of gritty eyes were associated factors of AR. Based on multivariate logistic model, we built two nomograms which included previously identified significant risk factors that could be acquired easily during clinical practice with predictive variables to assess their roles in predicting the risk of AR among outpatients with rhinitis. Conclusions: The characteristics of patients with different phenotypes of chronic rhinitis are distinctive in different seasons and the developed nomogram in this study might be beneficial for clinical practice.

Background: Epithelial gene expression in allergic rhinitis patients has been evaluated by microarray. However, gene expression in patients with nonallergic rhinitis and suspected allergic rhinitis who reported allergen-related nasal symptoms but presented a negative atopic test was unknown. Objectives: The aim of this study was to observe and compare epithelial gene expression in patients with allergic rhinitis, suspected allergic rhinitis, and nonallergic rhinitis. Methods: Nasal brushings were collected from healthy controls and from patients with allergic rhinitis, suspected allergic rhinitis, and nonallergic rhinitis. The expressions of 20 genes selected from a previous microarray study were measured by real-time PCR. Associations of these genes with allergen type, disease duration and severity, the grade of nasal smear eosinophilia, and serum total IgE were analyzed. Results: Twelve genes were confirmed to be upregulated in current adult allergic rhinitis patients allergic to multiple allergens, and 10 of them were also increased in the suspected allergic rhinitis and nonallergic rhinitis groups. TFF3 and ITLN1 expressions were increased in allergic rhinitis and suspected allergic rhinitis, but not nonallergic rhinitis. Different expressions between the allergic rhinitis and nonallergic rhinitis groups were found for 3 genes: CST1, TFF3, and ITLN1. In the allergic rhinitis patients, all 12 genes were upregulated in the seasonal and perennial groups; 9 of these 12 genes were also upregulated in the mixed group. In suspected allergic rhinitis patients, all 12 genes were upregulated in the perennial group; 8 of these 12 genes were also upregulated in the seasonal group and only 5 in the mixed group. No gene expression was associated with disease duration and serum total IgE. GCNT3 was positively correlated with the grade of nasal smear eosinophilia in the suspected allergic rhinitis group. Different genes were found to be associated with disease severity in different rhinitis groups. Conclusions: Patients with allergic rhinitis, suspected allergic rhinitis, and nonallergic rhinitis showed much similarity with regard to epithelial gene expression; most genes were related to Th2 inflammation. CST1, TFF3, and ITLN1 might have the ability to differentiate allergic rhinitis from nonallergic rhinitis. Understanding the mechanisms underlying different types of rhinitis may be helpful for rhinitis diagnosis and treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is currently a diagnosis of exclusion with an unclear pathophysiologic mechanism and limited treatment options. In patients diagnosed with NAR based on symptoms, negative skin testing and positive optical rhinometry (ORM), the study's objective was to evaluate the therapeutic action of intranasal capsaicin in the management of rhinitic symptoms and the effect on ORM readings. Methods: Patients with a history of NAR underwent screening by a diagnostic intranasal capsaicin challenge with ORM and skin‐prick testing. Twenty‐two NAR patients were enrolled and randomized to either treatment with 0.1mM capsaicin (n = 11) or placebo (n = 11). Treatment consisted of 5 consecutive intranasal applications separated by 1 hour with follow‐up at 4 and 12 weeks. At each visit, subjects underwent intranasal capsaicin challenge with ORM reading and a visual analog scale scoring of rhinitis symptoms. Results: Treatment with intranasal capsaicin resulted in a median change with improvement in total symptom score (TSS) of –5 from baseline vs an increase of 2 with placebo at 4 weeks, which remained significantly different between the groups at 12 weeks (p = 0.03). At 12 weeks posttreatment, 60% of the intervention group vs 80% of placebo‐treated patients still met objective criteria for NAR by ORM. Conclusion: Using ORM in the objective diagnosis of NAR, this trial showed that intranasal 0.1mM capsaicin not only improved rhinitic symptoms but also objectively reduced nasal reactivity and nasal congestion with a 40% responder rate at 12 weeks as noted by ORM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Bronchial hyper-responsiveness (BHR) is a feature of asthma which can also be found in patients with allergic or nonallergic rhinitis although the exact mechanism is not clear. Objective The aim was to investigate the relationship between nasal eosinophilia and BHR in patients with allergic rhinitis. Patients and methods A total of 26 patients with rhinitis were divided into two groups based on positive exercise challenge test for BHR. Nasal smears and blood samples were obtained to test for nasal eosinophilia and total serum immunoglobulin E, respectively. Results A higher percentage (50%) of patients with BHR demonstrated nasal eosinophilia compared with the group of patients with no BHR (17%). Conclusion This study demonstrates further evidence of the tight relationship between upper and lower respiratory tract in allergic disease.

This comprehensive practice parameter for allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) provides updated guidance on diagnosis, assessment, selection of monotherapy and combination pharmacologic options, and allergen immunotherapy for AR. Newer information about local AR is reviewed. Cough is emphasized as a common symptom in both AR and NAR. Food allergy testing is not recommended in the routine evaluation of rhinitis. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) remain the preferred monotherapy for persistent AR, but additional studies support the additive benefit of combination treatment with INCS and intranasal antihistamines in both AR and NAR. Either intranasal antihistamines or INCS may be offered as first-line monotherapy for NAR. Montelukast should only be used for AR if there has been an inadequate response or intolerance to alternative therapies. Depot parenteral corticosteroids are not recommended for treatment of AR due to potential risks. While intranasal decongestants generally should be limited to short-term use to prevent rebound congestion, in limited circumstances, patients receiving regimens that include an INCS may be offered, in addition, an intranasal decongestant for up to 4 weeks. Neither acupuncture nor herbal products have adequate studies to support their use for AR. Oral decongestants should be avoided during the first trimester of pregnancy. Recommendations for use of subcutaneous and sublingual tablet allergen immunotherapy in AR are provided. Algorithms based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion are provided to guide in the selection of pharmacologic options for intermittent and persistent AR and NAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is characterized by chronic rhinitis with localized nasal allergic response to allergens in the absence of systemic immunoglobulin (IgE)-mediated disease assessed by skin prick test (SPT) or specific serum IgE level. Nasal provocation test (NPT) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of LAR. Nasal eosinophilia is a known inflammatory marker in allergic rhinitis. We hypothesized that nasal eosinophilia can be used as a screening tool for LAR. Objective: To determine the applicability of nasal eosinophilia as a diagnostic tool for LAR. Methods: Forty-eight perennial nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) patients with SPT negative were recruited. Nasal cytology analysis was performed. NPTs with 3 allergens (mixed mites, mixed cockroaches, and Bermuda grass) were performed to diagnose LAR. Nasal symptoms combined with nasal patency were used to determine the results of NPT. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of nasal eosinophilia as a diagnostic tool of LAR were calculated. Results: LAR was diagnosed in 41.6% of the NAR patients. Nasal eosinophilia was found in 58% of the NAR patients. The sensitivity of nasal eosinophilia for diagnosing LAR was 80%, the specificity was 57.14%, the positive predictive value was 57.14%, and the negative predictive value was 80%. The most common allergen of LAR was mixed mites. Conclusion: Nasal eosinophilia on nasal cytology was a good screening tool for diagnosing LAR because of its high sensitivity and simplicity of the procedure. Unfortunately, the low specificity of nasal eosinophilia makes the NPT necessary for confirmation of LAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Not all rhinitis patients are affected by an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated inflammatory process. Skin and serum allergy assessments are limited in their ability to define local allergic rhinitis (LAR). Thus, patients with negative systemic allergy assessments comprise a mix of those who truly have nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) and patients with LAR. Objective: To determine the clinical characteristics of patients with NAR. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed on consecutive adults with rhinitis symptoms who underwent turbinate surgery. NAR patients were defined by excluding allergy using both systemic (serum-specific IgE and/or skin prick test) and local (inferior turbinate tissue-specific IgE) tests. Allergic rhinitis (AR) patients were defined by any positive systemic or local test toward aeroallergens. The clinical characteristics studied included allergic comorbidities (asthma, eczema, allergic conjunctivitis), inhalant allergen triggers (dust, pollen, animal dander), and environmental triggers (Cincinnati Irritant Index [CII]). Results: There were 154 participants (41.79 ± 14.78 years, 37.7% female). NAR patients (11.7%) were older (49.33 ± 15.99 vs 40.78 ± 14.38 years, P =.02), had less self-reported asthma (5.6% vs 36.3%, P <.01) and house dust inhalant trigger (38.9 vs 65.2%, P =.03) compared to AR patients. The CII score was similar for NAR and AR (31.06 ± 28.88 vs 35.49 ± 24.70, P =.61). Conclusion: Patients who were older, without asthma, and lacked an inhalant allergy trigger were more likely to have true NAR. Environmental triggers are not distinguishing features of NAR. This may be used as a guide to identify rhinitis patients whose symptoms are truly nonallergic etiology compared to those with falsely negative systemic allergy assessment but may still need management for LAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Rhinitis medicamentosa (RM) is a common condition resulting from overuse of topical nasal decongestants. Despite the prevalence in otolaryngologic practice, a clear treatment protocol has not been established. Our objective was to review the current published literature pertaining to the treatment of RM with the possibility of finding data that support one treatment over another.Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were examined for patients diagnosed with RM resulting from chronic use of topical nasal decongestants.Review Methods: The PRISMA standard (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) was utilized to identify English-language studies reporting treatment of patients with the primary diagnosis of RM after chronic use of a topical decongestant. Outcome measures of interest included patient-reported symptom relief and objective parameters. MINORS criteria (methodological index for nonrandomized studies) were used to assess the quality of articles.Results: A total of 350 articles were identified, 9 of which met final inclusion criteria for qualitative analysis. Outcomes defined in each publication were highly varied and relied on several unstandardized measures. The most commonly reported treatment option was topical nasal steroids, although overall there was limited evidence on which to base treatment recommendation.Conclusions: There is not adequate evidence to develop a standardized treatment protocol for RM. The development of a uniform questionnaire, standard outcomes to be measured, and a method of assessing such outcomes is necessary. Prospective randomized controlled studies are warranted to determine the optimal treatment regimen following diagnosis of RM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Chronic rhinitis impacts 60 million Americans and is associated with significant costs for patients. Although medical treatments are first line, some patients require surgical intervention such as vidian or posterial nasal neurectomy. Previous reviews have investigated the role of surgical management in chronic rhinitis, but none have investigated a longstanding treatment with recent interest: cryotherapy. Objective To identify the safety, efficacy, and durability of treatment response of cryotherapy in treating chronic rhinitis. Methods A systematic literature review was performed to identify studies that investigated the utility of cryotherapy in chronic rhinitis. Only studies with the primary objective of assessing the efficacy of cryotherapy on chronic rhinitis were included. Patients were classified as allergic rhinitis, nonallergic rhinitis (vasomotor rhinitis), or mixed rhinitis using the original author's criteria. Data were extracted regarding reported complications, treatment efficacy, and length of follow-up. Results A total of 110 abstracts were identified, of which 15 were included in this review. Epistaxis and nasal obstruction were commonly reported complications. No serious adverse events were reported. For obstructive symptoms, "reduced" symptoms were reported in 63.4% to 100% of patients. In regard to rhinorrhea, reports of reduced symptoms were experienced from 77% to 100% of patients. Seven studies used only patient-reported improvements without stratifying results based on symptom type; general improvements ranged from 67% to 100%. Nine studies noted symptom improvement in nonallergic cohorts ranging from 67% to 97.5% of patients. Four studies noted improvement in allergic cohorts ranging from 63.4% to 80% of patients. Two studies noted improvement in patients with mixed pictures ranging from 92.5% to 100%. Conclusions Although cryotherapy appears safe and efficacious, heterogeneous past investigations with low-quality evidence make strong, evidence-based recommendations difficult to make. Further study with validated metrics and controlled populations is certainly warranted and should be encouraged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Local allergic rhinitis (LAR) is a condition involving a localized nasal allergic response in absence of systemic atopy. Most studies on LAR have been performed in adults. We aimed to describe clinical characteristics of LAR pediatric patients, its clinical evolution over a 7-year follow-up period and to study the role of basophil activation test (BAT), for its diagnosis. Forty-four children with non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) were included (24 males, 20 females, aged under 15 years). Nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT) and BAT were performed with Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and Phleum pratense. Seven patients (16%) were diagnosed of LAR. Six reacted to D pteronyssinus and one to P pratense. All LAR and 86% of NAR patients presented perennial symptoms. Fifty-seven percent of NAR and LAR patients referred persistent symptoms. Around half of NAR and LAR patients reported mild-moderate clinical manifestations. Three LAR patients associated conjunctival symptoms, proportionally more than NAR patients (19%, 7 out of 37). NAR patients presented bronchial asthma (n = 10) more frequently than LAR children (n = 1). More than half of LAR and NAR patients presented family history of atopy. BAT was negative in all LAR patients. On follow-up, 3 LAR patients and 10 of the 25 NAR patients who agreed to be retested, presented systemic sensitization. Dust mites were the most frequent allergen involved. LAR should be ruled out in children with NAR. Almost half of children with LAR develop systemic sensitization over time. BAT shows low sensitivity for the diagnosis of LAR in children. • Local allergic rhinitis should be considered in children diagnosed as non-allergic. • BAT seems to be less sensitive for the diagnosis of LAR in children than in adults. • Almost half of LAR children and one fourth of NAR children will eventually develop AR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine the efficacy of posterior nasal nerve (PNN) cryoablation for improving the symptoms of chronic rhinitis., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: A private practice., Methods: This study evaluated medication usage and adverse effects of in-office PNN cryoablation with a handheld device in patients > 18 years with chronic (>6 months) allergic or nonallergic rhinitis for whom medical management failed. The total nasal symptom score (TNSS) and mini rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (mRQLQ) scores were compared before and after treatment., Results: This study included 127 patients with a mean age of 52.4 ± 16.9 years; 60.6% of patients were female and 49.6% had allergic rhinitis. Mean symptom scores decreased from 5.94 (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.51-6.43) to 3.44 (95% CI, 2.97-3.81, P  < .001) after the procedure, with clinically important decreases in 75 (59.1%) patients. For patients with baseline TNSS values of ≥4, 63.5% (66/104) had a clinically important decrease, whereas only 39.1% (9/23) of those with the lower baseline did ( P  = .04). Mean mRQLQ scores also decreased from 2.51 (95% CI, 2.29-2.72) to 1.28 (95% CI, 1.20-1.47, P  < .001) after the procedure. Seventy-eight of 273 (28.6%) medications were discontinued after the procedure. Adverse effects occurred in 18.1% (23/127) of patients with headache as the most common., Conclusion: PNN cryoablation improves nasal symptoms and quality of life in patients with chronic rhinitis. Patients with a higher baseline TNSS are more likely to experience significant symptomatic improvement., Competing Interests: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (© 2023 The Authors. OTO Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation.)

Abstract: Background: In contrast to the well‐known significant impairment of quality of life (QoL) in allergic rhinitis (AR), the degree of impairment in QoL in nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) remained unknown for a long time, due to a lack of a validated questionnaire to assess QoL in the NAR patient group. In this study, a validation of the mini‐RQLQ questionnaire in NAR patients was performed, followed by an assessment of QoL in NAR patients compared to AR and healthy controls. Secondly, use of medication and treatment satisfaction in AR and NAR was assessed. Methods: The study was an observational cohort study in 287 AR and 160 NAR patients. Patients with symptoms of rhinitis were recruited from a tertiary care outpatient clinic of the Otorhinolaryngology Department. Allergic rhinitis (AR) was defined as one or more positive results on skin prick testing and clinically relevant symptoms of rhinitis related to their sensitization. Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) was defined as clinically relevant symptoms of rhinitis but without positive results on skin prick testing. The mini‐RQLQ was successfully validated in this study for NAR patients. Results: Quality of life (QoL) in NAR patients was equally—and for some aspects even more—impaired compared to AR. More than half of both AR and NAR patients were unsatisfied with treatment. Conclusion: These results demonstrate a significant impairment in both AR and NAR patients in their QoL combined with a low treatment satisfaction, emphasizing the need for adequate treatment, especially in the NAR patient group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nasal and ocular challenges facilitate the evaluation of subjective and objective responses to defined allergen or irritant exposure. Nasal and ocular allergen challenges are the gold standard to diagnose allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis, respectively, and aid in the evaluation of novel therapies in clinical trials. Additionally, nasal and ocular allergen challenges might help identify medically relevant allergens in clinical practice. Nonspecific or irritant challenges evaluate mucosal hyperreactivity. Direct mucosal challenges, which can be performed in an office or research setting, expose the participant to higher allergen doses than common in the natural environment. Park studies and environmental chambers, which are most practical in clinical trials, more closely simulate natural allergen exposure. International consensus guidelines for nasal and ocular challenges do not exist. Therefore the positivity criteria, methodologies, and extract or allergen preparations used in challenges vary in the literature. Regardless of these limitations, nasal and ocular challenges are helpful clinical and research tools for nasal and ocular diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]