Allergen-specific nasal provocation testing: review by the rhinoconjunctivitis committee of the Spanish Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.
(33/45)
Specific nasal provocation testing (NPT) consists of eliciting a response from the nasal mucosa by controlled exposure to allergens. It is indicated in the diagnostic confirmation of allergic rhinitis and when discrepancies arise or difficulties exist in the assessment of a patient's medical history and the results of skin and/or serological tests. The technique is also applied to evaluate sensitivity to the allergen, the efficacy and safety profile of treatment, and in research on the pathophysiological mechanisms of nasal response to allergens. NPT also provides information on the etiology of occupational respiratory diseases of allergic origin. Although there have been many studies and publications on the use and standardization of bronchial provocation tests with allergen, few analyze specific NPT. In this review, the Rhinoconjunctivitis Committee of the Spanish Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology discuss the methodology, monitoring, and assessment of allergen-specific NPT in order to provide a practical and up-to-date review of the technique. (+info)
Caudal septoplasty: efficacy of a surgical technique-preliminary report.
(34/45)
Predictive role of nasal functionality tests in the evaluation of patients before nocturnal polysomnographic recording.
(36/45)
Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome is a disease characterized by a collapse of the pharyngeal airway resulting in repeated episodes of airflow cessation, oxygen desaturation, and sleep disruption. It is a common disorder affecting at least 2-4% of the adult population. The role of nasal resistance in the pathogenesis of sleep disordered breathing and sleep apnoea has not been completely clarified. Aim of the present study was to establish whether nasal resistance and nasal volumes, measured by means of Active Anterior Rhinomanometry and Acoustic Rhinometry together with Muco-Ciliary Transport time play a positive predictive role in the evaluation of Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome patients before running a nocturnal polysomnographic recording. A retrospective study was performed analysing 223 patients referred for suspected Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome. All patients were submitted to complete otorhinolaryngological evaluation and underwent nocturnal polysomnography. On the basis of polysomnographic data analysis, the apnoea-hypopnoea index and snoring index, patients were classified into two groups: Group 1 (110/223 patients) with a diagnosis of mild-moderate Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (apnoea-hypopnoea index < 30) and Group 2 (113/223 patients) affected by snoring without associated hypoxaemia/hypercapnia. A control group of 76 subjects, not complaining of sleep disorders and free from nasal symptoms was also selected. The results showed, in all the snoring and Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome patients, total nasal resistance and increased Muco-Ciliary Transport time compared to standard values. Furthermore, the apnoea-hypopnoea index was significantly higher in patients with higher nasal resistence and significantly different between the groups. These results allow us to propose the simultaneous evaluation of nasal functions by Active Anterior Rhinomanometry, Acoustic Rhinometry, and Muco-Ciliary Transport time in the selection of patients undergoing polysomnography. (+info)
Heated and humidified high-flow oxygen therapy reduces discomfort during hypoxemic respiratory failure.
(37/45)
BACKGROUND: Non-intubated critically ill patients are often treated by high-flow oxygen for acute respiratory failure. There is no current recommendation for humidification of oxygen devices. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized trial with a final crossover period to compare nasal airway caliber and respiratory comfort in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure receiving either standard oxygen therapy with no humidification or heated and humidified high-flow oxygen therapy (HHFO(2)) in a medical ICU. Nasal airway caliber was measured using acoustic rhinometry at baseline, after 4 and 24 hours (H4 and H24), and 4 hours after crossover (H28). Dryness of the nose, mouth, and throat was auto-evaluated and assessed blindly by an otorhinolaryngologist. After the crossover, the subjects were asked which system they preferred. RESULTS: Thirty subjects completed the protocol and were analyzed. Baseline median oxygen flow was 9 and 12 L/min in the standard and HHFO(2) groups, respectively (P = .21). Acoustic rhinometry measurements showed no difference between the 2 systems. The dryness score was significantly lower in the HHFO(2) group at H4 (2 vs 6, P = .007) and H24 (0 vs 8, P = .004). During the crossover period, dryness increased promptly after switching to standard oxygen and decreased after switching to HHFO(2) (P = .008). Sixteen subjects (53%) preferred HHFO(2) (P = .01), especially those who required the highest flow of oxygen at admission (P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: Upper airway caliber was not significantly modified by HHFO(2), compared to standard oxygen therapy, but HHFO(2) significantly reduced discomfort in critically ill patients with respiratory failure. The system is usually preferred over standard oxygen therapy. (+info)
Olfactory and trigeminal interaction of menthol and nicotine in humans.
(38/45)