2007OtolaryngologyRequires access

The effect of saline solutions on nasal patency and mucociliary clearance in rhinosinusitis patients

Garrett Hauptman, Matthew W. Ryan

Open publisher page 126 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of two saline nasal sprays on nasal patency and mucociliary clearance in patients with rhinosinusitis. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized double-blind trial. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eighty patients with rhinosinusitis at a tertiary care academic center had nasal patency and mucociliary clearance measured. Each patient was then treated with either physiological or hypertonic saline. Nasal patency and mucociliary clearance measurements were repeated after treatment. Subjective evaluation was also performed. RESULTS: Both solutions improved saccharine clearance times (P < 0.0001). Buffered physiological saline significantly affected nasal airway patency (P = 0.006). Both solutions improved symptoms of nasal stuffiness (P < 0.0001) and nasal obstruction (P < 0.0001). Buffered hypertonic saline caused increased nasal burning/irritation compared with buffered physiological saline (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Buffered physiological and buffered hypertonic saline nasal sprays both improve mucociliary clearance, which is beneficial for treatment of rhinosinusitis. Additionally, buffered physiological saline improves nasal airway patency, whereas buffered hypertonic saline has no effect. Both solutions provide symptomatic relief, but buffered hypertonic saline is more irritating.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of two saline nasal sprays on nasal patency and mucociliary clearance in patients with rhinosinusitis. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized double-blind trial. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eighty patients with rhinosinusitis at a tertiary care academic center had nasal patency and mucociliary clearance measured. Each patient was then treated with either physiological or hypertonic saline. Nasal patency and mucociliary clearance measurements were repeated after treatment. Subjective evaluation was also performed. RESULTS: Both solutions improved saccharine clearance times (P < 0.0001). Buffered physiological saline significantly affected nasal airway patency (P = 0.006). Both solutions improved symptoms of nasal stuffiness (P < 0.0001) and nasal obstruction (P < 0.0001). Buffered hypertonic saline caused increased nasal burning/irritation compared with buffered physiological saline (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Buffered physiological and buffered hypertonic saline nasal sprays both improve mucociliary clearance, which is beneficial for treatment of rhinosinusitis. Additionally, buffered physiological saline improves nasal airway patency, whereas buffered hypertonic saline has no effect. Both solutions provide symptomatic relief, but buffered hypertonic saline is more irritating.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 126 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of two saline nasal sprays on nasal patency and mucociliary clearance in patients with rhinosinusitis. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized double-blind trial. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eighty patients with rhinosinusitis at a tertiary care academic center had nasal patency and mucociliary clearance measured. Each patient was then treated with either physiological or hypertonic saline. Nasal patency and mucociliary clearance measurements were repeated after treatment. Subjective evaluation was also performed. RESULTS: Both solutions improved saccharine clearance times (P < 0.0001). Buffered physiological saline significantly affected nasal airway patency (P = 0.006). Both solutions improved symptoms of nasal stuffiness (P < 0.0001) and nasal obstruction (P < 0.0001). Buffered hypertonic saline caused increased nasal burning/irritation compared with buffered physiological saline (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Buffered physiological and buffered hypertonic saline nasal sprays both improve mucociliary clearance, which is beneficial for treatment of rhinosinusitis. Additionally, buffered physiological saline improves nasal airway patency, whereas buffered hypertonic saline has no effect. Both solutions provide symptomatic relief, but buffered hypertonic saline is more irritating.

Key concepts: Hypertonic saline, Mucociliary clearance, Saline, Medicine, Anesthesia, Nasal administration, Airway, Sinusitis

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The effect of saline solutions on nasal patency and mucociliary clearance in rhinosinusitis patients — Research Paper | ScholarLens