MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intranasal corticosteroids for nasal airway obstruction in children with moderate to severe adenoidal hypertrophy

2008· review· en· W2158624630 on OpenAlexaff
Linjie Zhang, Raúl Andrés Mendoza-Sassi, Juraci Almeida César, Neil K. Chadha

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdenoidectomyAdenoidCochrane LibraryAirway obstructionNasal administrationRandomized controlled trialNosePlaceboTonsillectomyAdenoid hypertrophyMeta-analysisPediatricsAnesthesiaAirwaySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Adenoidal hypertrophy is generally considered a common condition of childhood. When obstructive sleep apnoea or cardio-respiratory syndrome occurs, adenoidectomy is generally indicated. In less severe cases, non-surgical interventions may be considered, however few medical alternatives are currently available. Intranasal steroids may be used to reduce nasal airway obstruction. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of intranasal corticosteroids for improving nasal airway obstruction in children with moderate to severe adenoidal hypertrophy. SEARCH STRATEGY: Our search included the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2007), MEDLINE (1951 to 2007) and EMBASE (1974 to 2007). All searches were initially performed in May 2007 and updated in April 2008. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing intranasal corticosteroids with placebo or no intervention or other treatment in children aged 0-12 years with moderate to severe adenoidal hypertrophy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data from the included trials were extracted and trial quality was assessed by two authors independently. Meta-analysis was not applicable and data were summarised in a narrative format. MAIN RESULTS: Five randomised trials, including a total of 349 patients, met the inclusion criteria of the review. All trials except one showed significant efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids in improving nasal obstruction symptoms and in reducing adenoid size. The first eight-week cross-over study showed that treatment with beclomethasone (336 micrograms/day) yielded a greater improvement in mean symptom scores than placebo (-18.5 vs. -8.5, P < 0.05) and a larger reduction in mean adenoid/choana ratio than placebo (right, -14% vs. +0.4%, p=0.002; left, -15% vs. -2.0%, p=0.0006) between week 0 and week 4. The second four-week cross-over study demonstrated that the nasal obstruction index decreased by at least 50% from baseline in 38% of patients treated with beclomethasone (400 micrograms/day) between week 0 and week 2, whereas none of the patients treated with placebo had such improvement (p<0.01). The third randomized, parallel-group trial showed that 77.7% of patients treated with mometasone (100 micrograms/day) for 40 days demonstrated an improvement in nasal obstruction symptoms and a decrease in adenoid size, such that adenoidectomy could be avoided, whereas no significant improvement was observed in the placebo group. The fourth randomized, parallel-group trial showed that eight-weeks of treatment with flunisolide (500 micrograms/day) was associated with a lager reduction in adenoid size than isotonic saline solution (p<0.05). In contrast, one randomised, parallel-group trial did not find significant improvement in nasal obstruction symptoms and adenoid size after eight weeks of treatment with beclomethasone (200 micrograms/day). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Limited evidence suggests that intranasal corticosteroids may significantly improve nasal obstruction symptoms in children with moderate to severe adenoidal hypertrophy, and this improvement may be associated with a reduction of adenoid size. The long-term effect of intranasal corticosteroids in these patients remains to be defined.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations113
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207