Safety of long‐term intranasal budesonide delivered via the mucosal atomization device for chronic rhinosinusitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although short-term use (≤2 months) of atomized topical nasal steroids has been shown to be safe and effective, the long-term safety has yet to be demonstrated. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of long-term topical budesonide treatment via the mucosal atomization device (MAD) on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPAA) and intraocular pressure (IOP). METHODS: A cross-sectional study of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), with or without nasal polyposis, managed with daily nasal budesonide via MAD was conducted at a tertiary rhinology center. Patients using systemic steroids within 3 months of assessment were excluded. HPAA impact was assessed using the cosyntropin stimulation test for adrenal function and a survey of relevant symptomatology. Patients also underwent tonometry to assess for elevated IOP potentially related to corticosteroid use. RESULTS: A total of 100 CRS patients were recruited with a mean budesonide treatment duration of 23.5 months (range, 6-37 months). Stimulated cortisol response was diminished in 3 patients (3%). No patients with adrenal suppression had relevant symptomatology. IOP was elevated in 6 patients (6%). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that there is a risk of adrenal suppression and raised IOP associated with the long-term use of topical nasal budesonide via MAD. Otolaryngologists should consider periodic surveillance for these adverse events in this patient cohort.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".