4.3 Article

Sinonasal inhalation of dornase alfa administered by vibrating aerosol to cystic fibrosis patients: A double-blind placebo-controlled cross-over trial

Journal

JOURNAL OF CYSTIC FIBROSIS
Volume 13, Issue 4, Pages 461-470

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcf.2014.02.005

Keywords

Cystic fibrosis; Chronic rhinosinusitis; Sinonasal inhalation; Pari Sinus (TM); Dornase alfa; SNOT-20

Funding

  1. Roche Pharma Germany
  2. Pari Corp., Germany
  3. Roche

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis significantly impairs CF patients' quality of life and overall health. The Pari-Sinus (TM) device delivers vibrating aerosol effectively to paranasal sinuses. After a small pilot study to assess sinonasal inhalation of dornase alfa and placebo (isotonic saline) on potential sinonasal outcome measures, we present the subsequent prospective double-blind placebo-controlled crossover-trial. Methods: 23 CF patients were randomised to inhale either dornase alfa or isotonic saline for 28 days with the Pari-Sinus (TM) and after 28 days (wash-out) crossed over to the alternative treatment. The primary outcome parameter was primary nasal symptom score in the disease-specific quality of life Sino-Nasal Outcome-Test-20 (SNOT-20: nasal obstruction/sneezing/runny nose/thick nasal discharge/reduced smelling). Results: Primary nasal symptoms improved significantly with dornase alfa compared with no treatment, while small improvements with isotonic saline did not reach significance. SNOT-20 overall scores improved significantly after dornase alfa compared with isotonic saline (p = 0.017). Additionally, sinonasal dornase alfa but not isotonic saline significantly improved pulmonary function (FEF75-25: p = 0.021). Conclusion: Vibrating sinonasal inhalation of dornase alfa reduces rhinosinusitis symptoms in CF. (C) 2014 European Cystic Fibrosis Society. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available