U W Geisthoff1, M Rupp-Classen, A Blum, P K Plinkert. 1. Klinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde, Universitätskliniken des Saarlandes, Homburg. urban.geisthoff@uniklinik-saarland.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Some 10-20% of the population suffer from allergic rhinitis. A recently discussed and interesting, albeit disputed therapy option is the use of a lipid-based nasal ointment. METHOD: To test the efficacy of this nasal ointment as an adjuvant therapy for allergic rhinitis, a two-centre, prospective, open, randomized, controlled clinical study was carried out. RESULT: In the study, 17 patients using the test agent were compared with 16 who did not. For the group using the test agent, before and after comparisons showed a significant (about 40%) improvement in the medium, relative total range of symptoms (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney U-test, P<0.01) based on the individual parameters of sneezing attacks, nasal itching, nasal secretion and nasal obstruction. In the control group, non-use of the test agent meant that the total range of symptoms remained unchanged. No side effects were recorded. CONCLUSION: The test agent used in our study contains a lipid fraction, in this case in the form of high purity, long chain hydrocarbons. By local application, a significant improvement of the total symptomatology was shown. The mechanism has not been clarified. Owing to the efficacy and low risk of side effects, this seems to be a promising adjuvant therapy for allergic rhinitis. The probetoric use of this nasal ointment as a supportive therapeutic option should be reviewed in further clinical studies.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Some 10-20% of the population suffer from allergic rhinitis. A recently discussed and interesting, albeit disputed therapy option is the use of a lipid-based nasal ointment. METHOD: To test the efficacy of this nasal ointment as an adjuvant therapy for allergic rhinitis, a two-centre, prospective, open, randomized, controlled clinical study was carried out. RESULT: In the study, 17 patients using the test agent were compared with 16 who did not. For the group using the test agent, before and after comparisons showed a significant (about 40%) improvement in the medium, relative total range of symptoms (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney U-test, P<0.01) based on the individual parameters of sneezing attacks, nasal itching, nasal secretion and nasal obstruction. In the control group, non-use of the test agent meant that the total range of symptoms remained unchanged. No side effects were recorded. CONCLUSION: The test agent used in our study contains a lipid fraction, in this case in the form of high purity, long chain hydrocarbons. By local application, a significant improvement of the total symptomatology was shown. The mechanism has not been clarified. Owing to the efficacy and low risk of side effects, this seems to be a promising adjuvant therapy for allergic rhinitis. The probetoric use of this nasal ointment as a supportive therapeutic option should be reviewed in further clinical studies.