4.3 Article

Atopy and Quality of Life in Pediatric Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RHINOLOGY & ALLERGY
Volume 33, Issue 5, Pages 586-590

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1945892419854266

Keywords

pediatric chronic rhinosinusitis; aeroallergen sensitivity; quality of life; atopy; allergic rhinitis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Atopy has been suggested in the development of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), as allergic rhinitis (AR) is common coexisting disease in pediatric and adult patients with CRS. The contribution of AR to CRS is less clear till date. Objectives The objectives of this study were to determine atopic profile of children with CRS and impact of atopic status on disease severity and quality of life. Methods One hundred ten patients, aged between 7 and 18 years of age, diagnosed with CRS based on history, detailed clinical examination including nasal endoscopic examination were included in this cross-sectional study. Scoring of CRS was done according to Lund Mackay Endoscopic Appearance Score. Patients underwent skin prick test against 65 common aeroallergens (1:10 w/v, 50% glycerinated) for evidence of atopy. SN-5 Sinus and Nasal Quality of Life Survey was used to assess the quality of life in the study subjects. Results Positive skin prick test to at least one of the common aeroallergens was present in 58 (52.7%) patients. Most common aeroallergen sensitivity was seen with insects in 48 (43.6%) patients. Patients of CRS with atopy had higher mean Lund Mackay endoscopic score and SN-5 score than nonatopic patients which was statistically significant. Conclusion In conclusion, we recommend that testing for aeroallergen sensitivity and assessment of quality of life should be included in the protocol for diagnosis and management of pediatric patients with CRS. Early diagnosis and treatment of allergy may halt the progression of CRS and also the development of asthma and other allergic multimorbid disorders.

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