Value of Endolymphatic Hydrops and Perilymph Signal Intensity in Suspected Ménière Disease.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Ménière disease is characterized by endolymphatic hydrops, whereas perilymphatic enhancement on MR imaging has been suggested to be of additional value in diagnosing Ménière disease. This study evaluates the presence of endolymphatic hydrops and perilymphatic enhancement in patients with Ménière disease and with other vertigo-associated inner ear pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3D-FLAIR sequence 4 hours after intravenous gadolinium injection was performed to visualize the endolymph and perilymph in 220 patients suspected of having Ménière disease. Patients' ears were retrospectively categorized as having Ménière disease (probable or definite) or other vertigo-associated inner ear pathology not attributable to Ménière disease. Endolymphatic hydrops was evaluated using a visual classification system, and perilymphatic enhancement was scored both visually and quantitatively. RESULTS: Endolymphatic hydrops was present in 137 (91.9%) of the definite Ménière disease ears and in 9 (7.0%) of the ears with other vertigo-associated inner ear pathology (P < .001). The combination of endolymphatic hydrops and visually increased perilymphatic enhancement was present in 122 (81.9%) definite Ménière disease ears compared with 4 (3.1%) ears with other vertigo-associated inner ear pathology (P < .001). This combination increases the positive predictive value from 0.94 for endolymphatic hydrops and 0.91 for perilymphatic enhancement to 0.97. The addition of measured perilymphatic enhancement leads to a moderate decrease in sensitivity from 0.92 for endolymphatic hydrops to 0.86. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of perilymphatic enhancement and endolymphatic hydrops in patients suspected of having Ménière disease increases the positive predictive value in the diagnosis of definite Ménière disease.

Idiopathic rhinitis, the ongoing quest.

The term rhinitis in daily practice is used for nasal dysfunction causing symptoms-like nasal itching, sneezing, rhinorrhea and or nasal blockage. Chronic rhinitis can roughly be classified into allergic, infectious or nonallergic/noninfectious. When allergy, mechanical obstruction and infections have been excluded as the cause of rhinitis, a number of poorly defined nasal conditions of partly unknown aetiology and pathophysiology remain. The differential diagnosis of nonallergic noninfectious rhinitis is extensive. Although the percentage of patients with nonallergic noninfectious rhinitis with a known cause has increased the last decades, still about 50% of the patients with nonallergic noninfectious rhinitis has to be classified as suffering from idiopathic rhinitis (IR), or rather e causa ignota. Specific immunological, clinical and sometimes radiological and functional tests are required to distinguish known causes. Research to the underlying pathophysiology of IR has moved from autonomic neural dysbalans to inflammatory disorders (local allergy), the nonadrenergic noncholinergic (NANC) sensory peptidergic neural system and central neural hyperaesthesia, still without solid ground or proof. This review summarizes the currently known causes for nonallergic noninfectious rhinitis and possible treatments. Also possible pathophysiological mechanisms of IR are discussed.

Intranasal capsaicin reduces nasal hyperreactivity in idiopathic rhinitis: a double-blind randomized application regimen study.

BACKGROUND: In a recent study, we showed that intranasal capsaicin spray gives a significant and long-term reduction of symptoms in nonallergic noninfectious perennial rhinitis patients. However, in daily practice, the studied application regimen proved to be impractical because of the large number of visits required in a short period of time. In the present study, we conducted a double-blind double-dummy parallel groups trial to determine whether a more practical capsaicin application schedule is equally effective. METHODS: Thirty patients were randomized into two different treatment regimens: one group received capsaicin five times on the first day at 1-h intervals. This was followed by a placebo dummy once every second or third day for a total of five treatments 2 weeks after the capsaicin application (group A). The other group (B) received the placebo dummy five times on the first day followed by capsaicin once every second or third day for a total of five treatments 2 weeks after the placebo application. RESULTS: The visual analogue scale scores for overall nasal symptoms, rhinorrhea and nasal blockage showed significant decrease after the start of treatment in both groups, with a significantly steeper decrease in group A. A significant reduction in cold dry air dose responsiveness was also found up to 9 months after therapy in both groups, reflecting a decrease in nasal hyperreactivity. No significant changes in safety data (smell, blood pressure, heart rate) were found. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that intranasal capsaicin seems safe to use and that five treatments of capsaicin on a single day is at least as effective as five treatments of capsaicin in 2 weeks.

Inflammatory cells seem not to be involved in idiopathic rhinitis.

Mucosal inflammatory cellular infiltrates are correlated with nasal complaints in symptomatic allergic rhinitis. Some authors suggest inflammation of a neurogenic or immunogenic nature as an underlying disorder for idiopathic rhinitis (IR). We looked at the possible involvement of inflammatory cells in the pathogenesis of IR. Nasal biopsies were taken from sixty-five IR patients with significant nasal complaints and from twenty healthy controls with no nasal complaints. Inflammatory cells were quantified using monoclonal antibodies directed against lymphocytes, antigen-presenting cells, eosinophils, macrophages, monocytes, mast cells and other IgE-positive cells. No significant differences were found, for any cell, between IR patients and controls. We conclude that inflammatory cells do not seem to play an important role in this meticulously characterised group of IR patients.

Intranasal capsaicin is lacking therapeutic effect in perennial allergic rhinitis to house dust mite. A placebo-controlled study.

In a recent placebo-controlled study we demonstrated that capsaicin is an efficacious substance in the treatment of non-allergic non-infectious rhinitis. In this study the therapeutic effect lasted more than 9 months. This effect was not based on modulation of inflammation. To evaluate the effect of repeated application of capsaicin to patients with a nasal allergy to house dust mites (HDM), using the same treatment protocol as recently introduced in the treatment of non-allergic patients. Twenty-six patients with rhinitis, 15 females and 11 males (range: 20-46 years; mean 30.5), allergic to HDM were treated with either capsaicin or placebo in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group design. Nasal reactivity to HDM expressed as nasal symptoms, albumin and leukotriene levels in nasal lavage fluid and responsiveness to histamine, assessed as symptoms before and 6 weeks after treatment, were used to compare both treatment groups. In addition, visual analogue scales and rhinitis quality of life (RQL) assessment before, 6 weeks after and 3 months after treatment were used as outcome variables. No significant effect of capsaicin on nasal challenge tests with HDM (nasal symptoms, albumin and leukotriene levels), on VAS or RQL outcome 6 weeks or 3 month's after treatment, was demonstrated. Capsaicin did have a small effect on the area of the curve (AUC) of histamine dose response curves (P = 0.03). Desensitization with capsaicin in doses sufficient to control symptoms in patients with severe non-allergic rhinitis is lacking therapeutic effect in perennial allergic rhinitis.

The long-term effects of capsaicin aqueous spray on the nasal mucosa.

BACKGROUND: Capsaicin has been shown previously to reduce nasal complaints in patients with a non-allergic non-infectious perennial rhinitis. Proposed pathophysiological mechanisms for non-allergic non-infectious perennial rhinitis include a chronic inflammatory disorder of an antigenic or neurogenic nature as well as the possibility of a functional neuronal disorder. We hypothesized that the beneficial effect of capsaicin might be the result of a down-regulation of inflammation (by a reduction of inflammatory cells) or through modulation of neural tissue density. METHODS: Patients were treated with either a placebo or capsaicin spray solution delivering 0.15 mg of capsaicin per nostril once every second or third day for a total of seven treatments. Both sides were treated each visit. Biopsies were taken before and 2 weeks, 3 months and 9 months after the treatment period. Immunohistochemical staining of the biopsy specimen was performed to ascertain the effect of treatment on immunocompetent cell densities (quantitative) and neural tissue densities (semi-quantitative) in the nasal mucosa. RESULTS: Nasal complaints were significantly reduced in the capsaicin-treated group. The number of CD1+, CD25+, CD3+, CD68+, BMK13+, IgE+, tryptase+, and chymase+ cells did not significantly differ between capsaicin and placebo group. No significant differences between both groups were found in pan-neurogenic staining of nasal mucosa using neurofilament and synaptophysine. CONCLUSION: Capsaicin aqueous nasal spray has previously been shown to reduce nasal complaints without affecting cellular homeostasis or overall neurogenic staining up to 9 months after treatment. Immunocompetent cells are not involved in non-allergic non-infectious perennial rhinitis.

Intranasal capsaicin is efficacious in non-allergic, non-infectious perennial rhinitis. A placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Several authors described capsaicin, the pungent substance in red pepper, as an efficacious therapy for non-allergic non-infectious perennial rhinitis (NANIPER). Repeated capsaicin application induces peptide depletion and specific degeneration of the unmyelinated sensory C-fibres in the nasal mucosa. METHODS: We performed a placebo-controlled (NaCl 0.9%) study with 25 NANIPER patients. Daily record charts and visual analogue scales (VAS) were used for clinical evaluation. Nasal lavages were obtained before, during, and after treatment. RESULTS: There was a significant and long-term reduction in the VAS scores in the capsaicin group. No significant difference was found between the placebo and capsaicin treated groups for the mean group concentrations of leukotriene (LT) C4/D4/E4, prostaglandin D2 (PGD2), and tryptase. The levels of mast cell mediators, tryptase and PGD2, and leukotrienes, mediators derived from a variety of inflammatory cells, were low at baseline and comparable with levels observed in nasal lavages obtained from normals. CONCLUSION: As involvement of inflammation could not be demonstrated, it is not surprising that capsaicin has no effect on inflammatory mediators. This suggests that inflammatory cells do not play a major part in the pathogenesis of NANIPER.

The effect of nasal steroid aqueous spray on nasal complaint scores and cellular infiltrates in the nasal mucosa of patients with nonallergic, noninfectious perennial rhinitis.

Topical corticosteroids are the therapy of choice for nonallergic, noninfectious perennial rhinitis (NANIPER). However, the efficacy of steroid therapy in NANIPER is controversial, as is its mode of action. To our surprise, of 300 patients initially diagnosed as having NANIPER, only 65 reached threshold nasal symptom scores. Patients were randomized into four different treatment regimens: placebo administered twice daily (BD) for 8 weeks, fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray (FPANS) (200 microg) once daily (OD) and placebo OD for 8 weeks, FPANS (200 microg) OD and placebo OD for 4 weeks followed by FPANS (200 microg) BD for 4 weeks, and FPANS (200 microg) BD for 8 weeks. A small decrease in nasal symptoms was found, which only reached significance for sneezing in the FPANS 200 microg BD group. A significant dose-dependent decrease in immunocompetent cells was found in nasal biopsy specimens obtained before, after 4 weeks, and after 8 weeks of treatment. We conclude that FPANS did not significantly reduce nasal symptoms in this group of selected NANIPER patients, even though a significant effect on cells in the nasal mucosa was seen.

Fixation with Carnoy's fluid reduces the number of chymase-positive mast cells: not all chymase-positive mast cells are also positive for tryptase.

Mast cells in the nasal mucosa can be studied by means of monoclonal antibodies (mAb) against tryptase (T+MC) and chymase (C+MC). Fixation with acetone gives more positive cells than does fixation with Carnoy's fluid. In frozen biopsy specimens of allergic nasal mucosa fixed with acetone, the number of T+MC equals that of C+MC. When fixed with Carnoy's fluid, however, the number of T+MC is larger than the number of C+MC. The decrease in both T+MC and C+MC resulting from fixation with Carnoy's fluid is time-related and depends on the type of mAb used. Carnoy fixation time gives a decrease in the number of C+MC within 1 min, whereas the number of T+MC decreases only after 10 min. Within 1 min, the number of C+MC decreases to a level where continued fixation no longer gives further decreases in the number of cells. Two populations of mast cells can be distinguished here: one sensitive and the other insensitive to Carnoy's fluid. When double-staining is used, fixation with acetone gives three populations of mast cells: one positive for tryptase (T+C-MC), another positive for tryptase and chymase (T+C+MC), and a third one positive for chymase (T-C+MC). These three populations were found in lymph node, spleen, thymus, dermis, lung parenchyma, small intestinal submucosa, and nasal mucosa.

Mast cells, eosinophils and IgE-positive cells in the nasal mucosa of patients with vasomotor rhinitis. An immunohistochemical study.

Vasomotor rhinitis (VMR) is a disorder of unknown pathogenesis. Forty patients with VMR were carefully selected on the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria proposed by Mygind and Weeke. Nasal biopsy specimens were taken in the patient group as well as in a group of ten controls. Brush cytology was also taken in the VMR group. Inflammatory cells were identified and counted in the nasal mucosa, with the use of immunohistochemical techniques and a panel of monoclonal antibodies. Eosinophils were studied with the use of BMK13, EG2, and Giemsa. Mast cells were studied with anti-chymase (B7), anti-tryptase (G3) and toluidine blue. Sections were stained with IgE as well. There was no significant difference in the number of eosinophils, mast cells and IgE-positive cells between the two groups. Additionally, in contrast with other reports, in sections that were double-stained with anti-chymase and anti-tryptase, single chymase-positive cells were found.