Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: This study assessed the efficacy, safety and tolerability of a xyloglucan-based nasal spray in the treatment of symptoms of rhinosinusitis. METHODOLOGY: In this randomized, double-blind study, 40 patients with itching, nasal congestion or continuous sneezing and a Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) of ≥8 were randomized to 2 weeks' treatment with a xyloglucan-based nasal spray ("xyloglucan") or a physiological saline nasal spray ("saline"). Assessments included the TNSS, rhinosinusitis severity index, nocturnal awakenings, use of rescue medication, safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Baseline symptom scores were similar between groups. At treatment end, improvements from baseline were observed in both groups for TNSS (xyloglucan 58%; saline 35%, both p < .05) and number of nocturnal awakenings (p < .05). A significant improvement in the rhinosinusitis severity index was observed only with xyloglucan (p < .05). At treatment end, mean [SD] scores were significantly lower in the xyloglucan group versus the saline group for TNSS (3.60 [2.16] vs. 5.40 [2.64], p < .05), rhinosinusitis severity index (7.55 [1.19] vs. 6.45 [1.40], p < .05), and rhinorrhea and itching (both p < .05). No rescue medication was used. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: A xyloglucan-based nasal spray provided greater relief of rhinosinusitis symptoms than a physiological saline spray and was well tolerated. Trial registration number (EUDRACT): 2014-000143-32.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Allegrini et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: