Sandra Y. Lin

Clinical Practice Guideline Allergic Rhinitis

Objective Allergic rhinitis (AR) is one of the most common diseases affecting adults. It is the most common chronic disease in children in the United States today and the fifth most common chronic disease in the United States overall. AR is estimated to affect nearly 1 in every 6 Americans and generates

Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy for Pediatric Asthma and Rhinoconjunctivitis: A Systematic Review

2 to

American Rhinologic Society member survey on "maximal medical therapy" for chronic rhinosinusitis.

5 billion in direct health expenditures annually. It can impair quality of life and, through loss of work and school attendance, is responsible for as much as

Sinonasal epithelial cell expression of toll-like receptor 9 is decreased in chronic rhinosinusitis with polyps

2 to

Effectiveness of subcutaneous immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma: a systematic review.

4 billion in lost productivity annually. Not surprisingly, myriad diagnostic tests and treatments are used in managing this disorder, yet there is considerable variation in their use. This clinical practice guideline was undertaken to optimize the care of patients with AR by addressing quality improvement opportunities through an evaluation of the available evidence and an assessment of the harm-benefit balance of various diagnostic and management options. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline is to address quality improvement opportunities for all clinicians, in any setting, who are likely to manage patients with AR as well as to optimize patient care, promote effective diagnosis and therapy, and reduce harmful or unnecessary variations in care. The guideline is intended to be applicable for both pediatric and adult patients with AR. Children under the age of 2 years were excluded from the clinical practice guideline because rhinitis in this population may be different than in older patients and is not informed by the same evidence base. The guideline is intended to focus on a limited number of quality improvement opportunities deemed most important by the working group and is not intended to be a comprehensive reference for diagnosing and managing AR. The recommendations outlined in the guideline are not intended to represent the standard of care for patient management, nor are the recommendations intended to limit treatment or care provided to individual patients. Action Statements The development group made a strong recommendation that clinicians recommend intranasal steroids for patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR whose symptoms affect their quality of life. The development group also made a strong recommendation that clinicians recommend oral second-generation/less sedating antihistamines for patients with AR and primary complaints of sneezing and itching. The panel made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should make the clinical diagnosis of AR when patients present with a history and physical examination consistent with an allergic cause and 1 or more of the following symptoms: nasal congestion, runny nose, itchy nose, or sneezing. Findings of AR consistent with an allergic cause include, but are not limited to, clear rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, pale discoloration of the nasal mucosa, and red and watery eyes. (2) Clinicians should perform and interpret, or refer to a clinician who can perform and interpret, specific IgE (skin or blood) allergy testing for patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR who do not respond to empiric treatment, or when the diagnosis is uncertain, or when knowledge of the specific causative allergen is needed to target therapy. (3) Clinicians should assess patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR for, and document in the medical record, the presence of associated conditions such as asthma, atopic dermatitis, sleep-disordered breathing, conjunctivitis, rhinosinusitis, and otitis media. (4) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, immunotherapy (sublingual or subcutaneous) for patients with AR who have inadequate response to symptoms with pharmacologic therapy with or without environmental controls. The panel recommended against (1) clinicians routinely performing sinonasal imaging in patients presenting with symptoms consistent with a diagnosis of AR and (2) clinicians offering oral leukotriene receptor antagonists as primary therapy for patients with AR. The panel group made the following options: (1) Clinicians may advise avoidance of known allergens or may advise environmental controls (ie, removal of pets; the use of air filtration systems, bed covers, and acaricides [chemical agents formulated to kill dust mites]) in patients with AR who have identified allergens that correlate with clinical symptoms. (2) Clinicians may offer intranasal antihistamines for patients with seasonal, perennial, or episodic AR. (3) Clinicians may offer combination pharmacologic therapy in patients with AR who have inadequate response to pharmacologic monotherapy. (4) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a surgeon who can offer, inferior turbinate reduction in patients with AR with nasal airway obstruction and enlarged inferior turbinates who have failed medical management. (5) Clinicians may offer acupuncture, or refer to a clinician who can offer acupuncture, for patients with AR who are interested in nonpharmacologic therapy. The development group provided no recommendation regarding the use of herbal therapy for patients with AR.

International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is approved in the United States for the treatment of pediatric asthma and rhinitis; sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) does not have regulatory approval but is used in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of SCIT and SLIT for the treatment of pediatric asthma and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion, extracted data, and graded the strength of evidence for each clinical outcome. All studies were randomized controlled trials of children with allergic asthma or rhinoconjunctivitis treated with SCIT or an aqueous formulation of SLIT. Data sources were Medline, Embase, LILACS, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through May 2012. RESULTS: In 13 trials, 920 children received SCIT or usual care; in 18 studies, 1583 children received SLIT or usual care. Three studies compared SCIT with SLIT head-to-head in 135 children. The strength of evidence is moderate that SCIT improves asthma and rhinitis symptoms and low that SCIT improves conjunctivitis symptoms and asthma medication scores. Strength of evidence is high that SLIT improves asthma symptoms and moderate that SLIT improves rhinitis and conjunctivitis symptoms and decreases medication usage. The evidence is low to support SCIT over SLIT for improving asthma or rhinitis symptoms or medication usage. Local reactions were frequent with SCIT and SLIT. There was 1 report of anaphylaxis with SCIT. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence supports the efficacy of both SCIT and SLIT for the treatment of asthma and rhinitis in children.

Development and pilot-testing of a feasible, reliable, and valid operative competency assessment tool for endoscopic sinus surgery.

Background “Maximal medical therapy” is the standard of care for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) treatment before the recommendation for surgery. However, this therapy is not consistent. Therefore, as a first step in determining the role of the disparate “maximal medical” treatments for CRS, American Rhinologic Society (ARS) members were surveyed. Methods A survey was mailed to all nonresident members of the ARS (n = 723). Focusing on the time period before surgical intervention is first considered for CRS patients, the survey assessed types of therapies, frequency of use, details on antibiotic and steroid usage, use of computed tomography (CT), and demographic data of respondents. All responses were anonymous. Results Three hundred eight surveys were returned (43%). A majority of respondents used oral antibiotics and nasal steroids “almost always (>90%).” Oral antibiotics, oral steroids, nasal steroids, saline irrigation, and allergy testing were most commonly used at least “usually (50–90%).” The median antibiotic length was 3.1–4 weeks. The mean peak prednisone dose was 51.7 mg when oral steroids were used. Therapies that were rarely or never used by the majority included oral antifungals, antifungal spray, antibiotic spray, antibiotic nebulizer, steroid nebulizer, and i.v. antibiotics. Conclusion Oral antibiotics (median, 3.1–4 weeks) and nasal steroids are used >90% of the time by a majority of ARS members for maximal medical treatment of CRS.

EAACI Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy: Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis.

Background Innate immune recognition of pathogens by sinonasal epithelial cells may play an important role in the pathogenesis of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Previous studies have indicated that toll-like receptor (TLR) mRNA is present in sinonasal mucosa, and levels of TLR9 expression are decreased in recalcitrant CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). However, the cellular source and function of TLR9 in the sinonasal epithelium is not known. In this study, primary epithelial cell cultures were analyzed from control subjects and CRSwNP patients to determine the presence and function of TLR9 protein. Methods Primary epithelial cell cultures were established from 5 controls and 10 CRSwNP patients undergoing sinus surgery. Flow cytometry was used to confirm purity of epithelial cells and to assess expression of TLR9 protein. Epithelial cells were stimulated with TLR9 agonist, and mRNA was analyzed by real-time PCR for expression of human β-defensin (HBD) 2 and interleukin (IL)-8. Results Flow cytometry showed TLR9 protein in 100% of epithelial cells from controls and CRSwNP patients. The level of expression was 50% lower in CRS patients than in controls. Stimulation of epithelial cells with TLR9 agonist produced a 1.5- to 9-fold increase in HBD-2 and IL-8 mRNA expression. Conclusion Functional TLR9 protein is expressed by normal and diseased sinonasal epithelial cells. The level of TLR9 expression is decreased in CRSwNP patients, consistent with the previous finding of decreased TLR9 mRNA in whole sinonasal tissue. These findings suggest that impaired innate immune responses to pathogens via TLR9 on sinonasal epithelial cells may represent a critical mechanism in chronic inflammatory sinus disease.

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

To systematically review the effectiveness and safety of subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) for treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma, using formulations currently approved in the United States.

Effectiveness of Subcutaneous Versus Sublingual Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis and Asthma: A Systematic Review

Isam Alobid, MD, PhD1, Nithin D. Adappa, MD2, Henry P. Barham, MD3, Thiago Bezerra, MD4, Nadieska Caballero, MD5, Eugene G. Chang, MD6, Gaurav Chawdhary, MD7, Philip Chen, MD8, John P. Dahl, MD, PhD9, Anthony Del Signore, MD10, Carrie Flanagan, MD11, Daniel N. Frank, PhD12, Kai Fruth, MD, PhD13, Anne Getz, MD14, Samuel Greig, MD15, Elisa A. Illing, MD16, David W. Jang, MD17, Yong Gi Jung, MD18, Sammy Khalili, MD, MSc19, Cristobal Langdon, MD20, Kent Lam, MD21, Stella Lee, MD22, Seth Lieberman, MD23, Patricia Loftus, MD24, Luis Macias‐Valle, MD25, R. Peter Manes, MD26, Jill Mazza, MD27, Leandra Mfuna, MD28, David Morrissey, MD29, Sue Jean Mun, MD30, Jonathan B. Overdevest, MD, PhD31, Jayant M. Pinto, MD32, Jain Ravi, MD33, Douglas Reh, MD34, Peta L. Sacks, MD35, Michael H. Saste, MD36, John Schneider, MD, MA37, Ahmad R. Sedaghat, MD, PhD38, Zachary M. Soler, MD39, Neville Teo, MD40, Kota Wada, MD41, Kevin Welch, MD42, Troy D. Woodard, MD43, Alan Workman44, Yi Chen Zhao, MD45, David Zopf, MD46