A Comparative Study of Different Administrations of Nebulized Hyaluronic Acid After Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery for Chronic Rhinosinusitis

• Published in: Indian journal of otolaryngology, and head, and neck surgery Vol. 74; no. Suppl 2; pp. 1037 - 1043
• Main Authors: Abbate, Vincenzo, Iaconetta, Giorgio, Maglitto, Fabio, Improta, Giovanni, Romano, Antonio, Bonavolontà, Paola, Seidita, Francesco, Califano, Luigi, Dell’Aversana Orabona, Giovanni
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New Delhi Springer India 01.10.2022; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Endoscopy; Head and Neck Surgery; Hyaluronic acid; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Original; Original Article; Otorhinolaryngology; Rhinitis; Sinusitis; SNOT-22; Nasal douche; ESS; Hyaluronic acid; FESS; Nasal spray
• ISSN: 2231-3796; 0973-7707
• DOI: 10.1007/s12070-020-02110-6

Hyaluronic Acid (HA) plays many roles in wound healing in general, through different mechanisms. Several authors reported the effectiveness of hyaluronic acid in promoting mucosal healing and reducing discomfort for patients after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Different methods for HA nasal administration have been reported. The aim of our study has been to evaluate the efficacy of the administration of nebulized HA through a nasal douche compared with its administration through a nasal spray with patients undergoing ESS for chronic rhinosinusitis. From January 2013 to January 2019 a prospective clinical trial was carried out in our hospital with 163 patients who had undergone ESS for chronic rhinosinusitis. The sample was divided into three groups according to the method of administration of HA. Our study confirm the efficacy of the administration of nebulized HA through nasal douche in post-operative care (6.5% vs 4.5%). The most relevant data regards the nasal dryness sign: the data revealed an unexpected percentage of worsening of that sign at time T3 ( p  = 0.049) particularly evident in the patients treated with HA through nasal douche compared to whom the nasal spray device was prescribed (4% vs 1%). Further studies are needed to identify the best means of administration of HA, which would satisfy the requirements for efficacy in terms of the results and, at the same time, patient compliance.