The Experts below are selected from a list of 1551 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Brian J Lipworth - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
peak inspiratory flow rate is more sensitive than Acoustic Rhinometry or rhinomanometry in detecting corticosteroid response with nasal histamine challenge
Rhinology, 2003Co-Authors: Andrew M Wilson, Erika J Sims, F M Robb, Wendy Cockburn, Brian J LipworthAbstract:: Nasal histamine challenge testing is a standard method of assessing upper airway hyperreactivity although there is still debate as to the best measure of response. The aim of the study was to evaluate peak nasal inspiratory flow rate (PIFR) as an endpoint during histamine challenge and compare this with rhinomanometry (Rhino) and Acoustic Rhinometry (AR). Twenty two patients with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) were enrolled into a 2-way randomised crossover study comparing placebo with intra-nasal mometasone furoate (MF) 200 mg once daily, with laboratory measurements of PIFR, AR and Rhino being made during histamine nasal challenge after each 10-14 day treatment period. Patients also recorded their domiciliary nasal symptoms and PIFR on a daily basis. With nasal challenge testing using PIFR PC30 there was a significant (p < 0.05) difference between MF and placebo but not with PC30 AR or PC175 Rhino. There was also significant (p < 0.05) improvement in terms of domiciliary total nasal symptom scores but not domiciliary PIFR. In conclusion PIFR after nasal challenge with histamine is a sensitive test of response to treatment with intra-nasal corticosteroids in PAR.
-
effects of topical corticosteroid and combined mediator blockade on domiciliary and laboratory measurements of nasal function in seasonal allergic rhinitis
Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology, 2001Co-Authors: Andrew M Wilson, Erika J Sims, Linda C Orr, Wendy J Coutie, P S White, Q Gardiner, Brian J LipworthAbstract:Background Both domiciliary and laboratory measures of nasal function have been used to evaluate treatment response in allergic airways disease; however, these measures have not been compared. Objective To determine the relationship of domiciliary measures (daily symptoms, peak inspiratory nasal flow, and nasal oral index) and laboratory measures (rhinomanometry, Acoustic Rhinometry) in assessing treatment response with topical steroids and specific inflammatory mediator blockage. Methods Twenty-one patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and asthma were enrolled into a single-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study comparing 2 weeks of 1) 400 μg inhaled plus 200 μg intranasal budesonide once daily and 2) 10 mg montelukast plus 10 mg cetirizine once daily. Before each treatment, patients received 7 to 10 days of placebo period. Laboratory measurements were made of nasal resistance by posterior rhinomanometry, and nasal volume between 0 and 5 cm by Acoustic Rhinometry after both placebo and active treatment periods. Daily domiciliary recordings were made of allergic rhinitis nasal symptoms scores and peak nasal and oral inspiratory flow rate (enabling the calculation of a nasal/oral index) throughout the study. Results There were significant ( P P = 0.02); nasal/oral index (R = −0.55 P = 0.01); rhinomanometry (R = 0.24, P = 0.30); and Acoustic Rhinometry (R= −0.21, P = 0.36). Conclusions Both treatments were effective in managing allergic rhinitis symptoms, and patients' symptoms were more closely associated with domiciliary measurements of nasal flow than laboratory measurements of nasal function.
-
effects of monotherapy with intra nasal corticosteroid or combined oral histamine and leukotriene receptor antagonists in seasonal allergic rhinitis
Clinical & Experimental Allergy, 2001Co-Authors: Andrew M Wilson, Erika J Sims, Brian J LipworthAbstract:Background The combination of a leukotriene receptor antagonist with an antihistamine may have beneficial effects in seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Objective To determine how combined oral mediator blockade compares to monotherapy with intranasal corticosteroid in the treatment of SAR. Methods Twenty-two patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis were enrolled in a placebo controlled crossover study comparing 2 weeks therapy of either (a) 200 μg intranasal mometasone furoate (MF) once daily or (b) 10 mg oral montelukast plus 10 mg oral cetirizine once daily (MON/CZ), with a 7-10 day placebo period prior to each treatment period. Domiciliary measures of symptoms and nasal flow were recorded daily. Measurements of posterior rhinomanometry, Acoustic Rhinometry and nasal nitric oxide were made after all treatment and placebo periods. Results There were significant (P < 0.05) improvements in domiciliary peak nasal flow (l/min) with both MF (133 (3.8)) and MON/CZ (124 (3.8)) compared to pooled placebo (110 (4.0). Both treatments also showed significant improvement in terms of nasal blockage (units) (PL: 1.1(0.1), MF: 0.5 (0.1), MON/CZ 0.7 (0.1); and total nasal symptoms (units) (PL: 3.5 (0.3), MF 1.6 (0.3), MON/CZ 1.7 (0.3)), although there was no significant difference between the two active treatments. There were no significant differences between placebo and treatment for rhinomanometry, Acoustic Rhinometry or nitric oxide. Conclusions Both intranasal mometasone furoate as monotherapy and oral cetirizine plus montelukast as cotherapy were equally effective for objective and subjective measures of treatment response in SAR. Domiciliary measurements of symptoms and peak flow were more sensitive than laboratory measurements of rhinomanometry, Acoustic Rhinometry and nasal nitric oxide.
C E Austin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Acoustic Rhinometry compared with anterior rhinomanometry in the assessment of the response to nasal allergen challenge
Clinical Otolaryngology, 1994Co-Authors: Glenis K. Scadding, Y.c. Darby, C E AustinAbstract:Acoustic Rhinometry was used to assess nasal airway patency objectively and was compared with the more established method of anterior rhinomanometry. Ten patients with allergic rhinitis underwent 15 nasal challenges with allergen to which they showed positive skin-prick tests. Responses were assessed by measuring the minimum nasal cross-sectional area (Amin.) using Acoustic Rhinometry and by measuring nasal airway resistance (NAR) using anterior rhinomanometry. The measurements of Amin. and NAR showed a significant negative correlation. Acoustic Rhinometry appears to be superior to anterior rhinomanometry in quantifying the response to nasal allergen challenge and may be particularly useful in patients with initial nasal blockage.
-
Acoustic Rhinometry compared with posterior rhinomanometry in the measurement of histamine and bradykinin induced changes in nasal airway patency
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 1994Co-Authors: C E Austin, J C ForemanAbstract:Abstract 1. Acoustic Rhinometry is a relatively new method for objectively assessing nasal airway patency. In this paper we compare Acoustic Rhinometry with active posterior rhinomanometry. 2. Twenty normal healthy volunteers underwent nasal challenge with either histamine or bradykinin, 100 micrograms to 1000 micrograms, and responses were assessed by Acoustic Rhinometry. A further 20 subjects received identical nasal challenges and responses were assessed by active posterior rhinomanometry. 3. On a subsequent occasion, the subjects challenged previously with histamine, were given the selective H1-receptor antagonist, cetirizine, 10 mg orally, 3 h before repeat nasal challenge with histamine, 100-1000 micrograms. Again, responses were assessed by active posterior rhinomanometry and Acoustic Rhinometry. 4. The Acoustic reflection measurements and the nasal airway resistance measurements showed comparable, significant dose-related changes in nasal patency to both histamine and bradykinin. Pretreatment with cetirizine blocked the histamine-induced change in nasal patency as measured by both methods. 5. We conclude that Acoustic Rhinometry has a number of advantages over posterior rhinomanometry. It is quick to perform, requires minimal subject co-operation and gives a reliable objective, measurement of dose-related changes in nasal airway patency before and after pharmacological treatment.
Andrew M Wilson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
peak inspiratory flow rate is more sensitive than Acoustic Rhinometry or rhinomanometry in detecting corticosteroid response with nasal histamine challenge
Rhinology, 2003Co-Authors: Andrew M Wilson, Erika J Sims, F M Robb, Wendy Cockburn, Brian J LipworthAbstract:: Nasal histamine challenge testing is a standard method of assessing upper airway hyperreactivity although there is still debate as to the best measure of response. The aim of the study was to evaluate peak nasal inspiratory flow rate (PIFR) as an endpoint during histamine challenge and compare this with rhinomanometry (Rhino) and Acoustic Rhinometry (AR). Twenty two patients with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) were enrolled into a 2-way randomised crossover study comparing placebo with intra-nasal mometasone furoate (MF) 200 mg once daily, with laboratory measurements of PIFR, AR and Rhino being made during histamine nasal challenge after each 10-14 day treatment period. Patients also recorded their domiciliary nasal symptoms and PIFR on a daily basis. With nasal challenge testing using PIFR PC30 there was a significant (p < 0.05) difference between MF and placebo but not with PC30 AR or PC175 Rhino. There was also significant (p < 0.05) improvement in terms of domiciliary total nasal symptom scores but not domiciliary PIFR. In conclusion PIFR after nasal challenge with histamine is a sensitive test of response to treatment with intra-nasal corticosteroids in PAR.
-
effects of topical corticosteroid and combined mediator blockade on domiciliary and laboratory measurements of nasal function in seasonal allergic rhinitis
Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology, 2001Co-Authors: Andrew M Wilson, Erika J Sims, Linda C Orr, Wendy J Coutie, P S White, Q Gardiner, Brian J LipworthAbstract:Background Both domiciliary and laboratory measures of nasal function have been used to evaluate treatment response in allergic airways disease; however, these measures have not been compared. Objective To determine the relationship of domiciliary measures (daily symptoms, peak inspiratory nasal flow, and nasal oral index) and laboratory measures (rhinomanometry, Acoustic Rhinometry) in assessing treatment response with topical steroids and specific inflammatory mediator blockage. Methods Twenty-one patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and asthma were enrolled into a single-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study comparing 2 weeks of 1) 400 μg inhaled plus 200 μg intranasal budesonide once daily and 2) 10 mg montelukast plus 10 mg cetirizine once daily. Before each treatment, patients received 7 to 10 days of placebo period. Laboratory measurements were made of nasal resistance by posterior rhinomanometry, and nasal volume between 0 and 5 cm by Acoustic Rhinometry after both placebo and active treatment periods. Daily domiciliary recordings were made of allergic rhinitis nasal symptoms scores and peak nasal and oral inspiratory flow rate (enabling the calculation of a nasal/oral index) throughout the study. Results There were significant ( P P = 0.02); nasal/oral index (R = −0.55 P = 0.01); rhinomanometry (R = 0.24, P = 0.30); and Acoustic Rhinometry (R= −0.21, P = 0.36). Conclusions Both treatments were effective in managing allergic rhinitis symptoms, and patients' symptoms were more closely associated with domiciliary measurements of nasal flow than laboratory measurements of nasal function.
-
effects of monotherapy with intra nasal corticosteroid or combined oral histamine and leukotriene receptor antagonists in seasonal allergic rhinitis
Clinical & Experimental Allergy, 2001Co-Authors: Andrew M Wilson, Erika J Sims, Brian J LipworthAbstract:Background The combination of a leukotriene receptor antagonist with an antihistamine may have beneficial effects in seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). Objective To determine how combined oral mediator blockade compares to monotherapy with intranasal corticosteroid in the treatment of SAR. Methods Twenty-two patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis were enrolled in a placebo controlled crossover study comparing 2 weeks therapy of either (a) 200 μg intranasal mometasone furoate (MF) once daily or (b) 10 mg oral montelukast plus 10 mg oral cetirizine once daily (MON/CZ), with a 7-10 day placebo period prior to each treatment period. Domiciliary measures of symptoms and nasal flow were recorded daily. Measurements of posterior rhinomanometry, Acoustic Rhinometry and nasal nitric oxide were made after all treatment and placebo periods. Results There were significant (P < 0.05) improvements in domiciliary peak nasal flow (l/min) with both MF (133 (3.8)) and MON/CZ (124 (3.8)) compared to pooled placebo (110 (4.0). Both treatments also showed significant improvement in terms of nasal blockage (units) (PL: 1.1(0.1), MF: 0.5 (0.1), MON/CZ 0.7 (0.1); and total nasal symptoms (units) (PL: 3.5 (0.3), MF 1.6 (0.3), MON/CZ 1.7 (0.3)), although there was no significant difference between the two active treatments. There were no significant differences between placebo and treatment for rhinomanometry, Acoustic Rhinometry or nitric oxide. Conclusions Both intranasal mometasone furoate as monotherapy and oral cetirizine plus montelukast as cotherapy were equally effective for objective and subjective measures of treatment response in SAR. Domiciliary measurements of symptoms and peak flow were more sensitive than laboratory measurements of rhinomanometry, Acoustic Rhinometry and nasal nitric oxide.
Wilma Terezinha Anselmo Lima - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effect of rapid maxillary expansion on the dimension of the nasal cavity and on facial morphology assessed by Acoustic Rhinometry and rhinomanometry
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, 2012Co-Authors: Carla E Itikawa, Fabiana Cardoso Pereira Valera, Mírian Aiko Nakane Matsumoto, Wilma Terezinha Anselmo LimaAbstract:OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of rapid maxillary expansion on facial morphology and on nasal cavity dimensions of mouth breathing children by Acoustic Rhinometry and computed rhinomanometry. METHODS: Cohort; 29 mouth breathing children with posterior crossbite were evaluated. Orthodontic and otorhinolaryngologic documentation were performed at three different times, i.e., before expansion, immediately after and 90 days following expansion. RESULTS: The expansion was accompanied by an increase of the maxillary and nasal bone transversal width. However, there were no significant differences in relation to mucosal area of the nose. Acoustic Rhinometry showed no difference in the minimal cross-sectional area at the level of the valve and inferior turbinate between the periods analyzed, although rhinomanometry showed a statistically significant reduction in nasal resistance right after expansion, but were similar to pre-treatment values 90 days after expansion. CONCLUSION: The maxillary expansion increased the maxilla and nasal bony area, but was inefficient to increase the nasal mucosal area, and may lessen the nasal resistance, although there was no difference in nasal geometry. Significance: Nasal bony expansion is followed by a mucosal compensation.
S Martin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
minimal cross sectional areas nasal peak flow and patients satisfaction in septoplasty and inferior turbinectomy
Rhinology, 1994Co-Authors: J Marais, J A Murray, I Marshall, N Douglas, S MartinAbstract:Changes in minimal cross-sectional areas, measured by Acoustic Rhinometry as well as nasal peak flow fractions and linear analogue patients' satisfaction scores, were measured in two groups of eight patients each, undergoing septoplasty alone and septoplasty combined with trimming of the inferior turbinates, respectively. Patients who had both procedures performed showed the greatest increase in both minimal cross-sectional areas and peak flow fractions, and both of these parameters were closely correlated with patients' satisfaction, whether the patient was satisfied or not. Pre-operative nasal obstruction was worse in the dual-procedure group, but post-operative satisfaction was significantly greater in these patients. Both Acoustic Rhinometry and nasal peak flow fractions can be recommended as accurate and easy to perform pre-operative measurements in patients undergoing surgery for nasal obstruction.
