Amsterdam positional OSA classification: the AASM 2012 recommended hypopnoea criteria increases the number of positional therapy candidates.

PURPOSE: This study examined the effect of hypopnoea criteria on the prevalence of positional obstructive sleep apnoea (pOSA) identified under the Amsterdam Positional OSA Classification (APOC) system. METHODS: Three hundred three consecutive patients undertaking polysomnography (PSG) for the suspicion of OSA were included in this retrospective investigation. PSGs were scored using both the 2007 American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) recommended hypopnoea criteria (AASM2007Rec) and the 2012 AASM recommended hypopnoea criteria (AASM2012Rec). For each hypopnoea criteria, OSA patients were grouped according to the APOC categories (I, II or II) or else deemed non-APOC if they did not meet the APOC criteria. Outcome measures, such as Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ), MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) and psychomotor vigilance task (PVT), were also compared between the groups. RESULTS: The AASM2012Rec increased the prevalence of OSA compared to AASM2007Rec. The AASM2012Rec trebled the number of APOC I patients compared to AASM2007Rec (297% increase) as well as increased the proportion of females in the APOC I group. AASM2012Rec did not change the number of APOC II and APOC III patients. In fact, the same patients were present in these categories irrespective of hypopnoea criteria. The proportion of non-APOC patients proportionally decreased with the AASM2012Rec criteria. There were no differences in outcome measures between the AASM2012Rec and AASM2007Rec groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that, compared to AASM2007Rec, AASM2012Rec increases the prevalence of who could be successfully treated with positional therapy. The proportion of females with pOSA also increases as a consequence of AASM2012Rec.

[Rhinosinusitis]. / Les rhinosinusites.

Rhinosinusitis is an important health problem which is increasing in frequency and which has a large financial repercussion on society. Better understanding of ARS management has modified our clinical approach leading us to minimize unnecessary use of radiological investigations, overuse of antibiotics, and improve the under utilisation of nasal corticosteroids. The goal of this article is to present important new guidelines mainly based on the European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2012 (EPOS 2012) in order to facilitate ARS management in general practice.

Specialist-based treatment reduces the severity of allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Although the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) is now well established, its impact on severity has not yet been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to analyse specialist-based treatment on AR severity, nasal symptoms and quality of life. METHODS: A longitudinal observational, prospective, multi-centre study with 4 weeks of follow-up was carried out by 141 allergologists and ENT specialists in Spain. Selection criteria were adult patients with AR, clinically diagnosed at least 2 years before, with a total nasal symptom score (TNSS) ≥5, not receiving either antihistamines within the previous week or nasal corticosteroids during the 2 previous weeks. Disease severity using both original Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (o-ARIA) and modified (m-ARIA) classifications, nasal symptoms, and Quality of Life (ESPRINT-15), were measured at baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Among the recruited AR patients (n = 707, 58% women), 39.3% were intermittent and 60.7% persistent, 40.2% had asthma and 61.4% conjunctivitis. Most patients were treated with second generation antihistamines in monotherapy (63.2%) or in combination with intranasal corticosteroids (31.5%). While using o-ARIA, 96.9% of patients had 'moderate/severe' AR, the m-ARIA discriminated between 'moderate' (55.4%) and severe (41.5%) AR, at baseline. After 4 weeks of treatment, improvement was found on disease severity (P < 0.0001), TNSS (8.2 ± 1.8 vs. 3.5 ± 2.3, P < 0.0001) and Quality of Life (ESPRINT-15 global score: 3.0 ± 1.2 vs. 1.1 ± 1.0, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Specialist-based treatment reduces AR severity, evaluated using the m-ARIA classification for the first time, in addition to the improvement of nasal symptoms and quality of life. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Specialist-based treatment improves AR severity, in addition to nasal symptoms and quality of life. However, no matter the treatment option some AR patients remain severe and need further follow-up.

[ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma). Achievements in 10 years and future needs in Latin America]. / ARIA (Rinitis Alérgica y su Impacto en Asma). Logros en 10 años y necesidades futuras en América Latina.

Allergic rhinitis and asthma represent global problems of public health affecting all age groups; asthma and allergic rhinitis frequently coexist in the same patients. In Latin American prevalence of allergic rhinitis, although variable, is very high. Allergic rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) started during a workshop of the World Health Organization performed in 1999 and was published in 2001. ARIA proposed a new classification of allergic rhinitis in intermittent or persistent and mild or moderate-severe. This approach of classification reflects more nearly the impact of allergic rhinitis in patients. In its review of 2010 ARIA developed guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of allergic rhinitis and of clinical practices for management of comorbidities of allergic rhinitis and asthma based on GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Development and Evaluation). ARIA has been spread and implemented in more than 50 countries. In Latin American an intense activity has been developed to spread these recommendations in almost all the countries of the region and it is important to record the obtained goals in the diffusion and implementation of ARIA, as well as to identify the unsatisfied needs from the clinical, research and implementation points of view. Final objective is to reinforce the priority that allergy and asthma should have, especially in children, in the programs of public health, as they have been prioritized in European Union in 2011.

La rinitis alérgica y el asma representan problemas globales de salud pública que afectan a todos los grupos etarios; el asma y la rinitis alérgica frecuentemente coexisten en los mismos pacientes. En América Latina la prevalencia de rinitis alérgica, aunque variable, es muy elevada. La iniciativa Rinitis Alérgica y su Impacto en Asma (globalmente conocida como ARIA, de su nombre en inglés Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) comenzó durante un taller de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) realizado en 1999 que se publicó en el año 2001. ARIA propuso una nueva clasificación de rinitis alérgica en intermitente o persistente y leve o moderada-severa. Este esquema de clasificación refleja más estrechamente el impacto de la rinitis alérgica en los pacientes. En su revisión de 2010, la guía ARIA desarrolló pautas para el diagnóstico y tratamiento de la rinitis alérgica y de prácticas clínicas para el manejo de las comorbilidades de la rinitis alérgica y el asma basadas en GRADE (Gradación de Recomendaciones, Desarrollo y Evaluación). ARIA se ha diseminado e implantado en más de 50 países. En América Latina se ha desarrollado una intensa actividad para diseminar estas recomendaciones en casi todos los países de la región y es importante llevar un registro de los logros obtenidos en la difusión e implantación de ARIA, además de identificar las necesidades insatisfechas desde el punto de vista clínico, de la investigación y de la implantación. El objetivo final es reforzar la prioridad que deben tener la alergia y el asma ­especialmente en niños­ en los programas de Salud Pública, tal como los priorizó la Unión Europea en 2011.

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA): achievements in 10 years and future needs.

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma represent global health problems for all age groups. Asthma and rhinitis frequently coexist in the same subjects. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) was initiated during a World Health Organization workshop in 1999 (published in 2001). ARIA has reclassified AR as mild/moderate-severe and intermittent/persistent. This classification closely reflects patients' needs and underlines the close relationship between rhinitis and asthma. Patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are confronted with various treatment choices for the management of AR. This contributes to considerable variation in clinical practice, and worldwide, patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are faced with uncertainty about the relative merits and downsides of the various treatment options. In its 2010 Revision, ARIA developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of AR and asthma comorbidities based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. ARIA is disseminated and implemented in more than 50 countries of the world. Ten years after the publication of the ARIA World Health Organization workshop report, it is important to make a summary of its achievements and identify the still unmet clinical, research, and implementation needs to strengthen the 2011 European Union Priority on allergy and asthma in children.

Validation of the modified allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma (ARIA) severity classification in allergic rhinitis children: the PEDRIAL study.

BACKGROUND: A modified allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma (ARIA) (m-ARIA) criterion to classify the severity of allergic rhinitis (AR) has recently been validated in both treated and untreated adult patients; however, such information in children is lacking. The aim of this study was to validate this m-ARIA severity criterion, which allows for discrimination between moderate and severe AR, in a large pediatric patient sample population. METHODS: The m-ARIA classification categorizes AR severity into mild (no affected items), moderate (1-3 affected items), and severe (all four affected items). We applied this modified criterion to untreated AR pediatric patients aged 6-12 years, through an observational, cross-sectional, and multicenter study. AR symptoms were assessed using the Total Four Symptom Score (T4SS), and the severity was evaluated by both ARIA severity items and visual analogue scale (VAS). RESULTS: Allergic rhinitis pediatric patients (N = 1269) from 271 centers were included. Among them, 59.5% had intermittent and 40.5% persistent disease; 89.9% had moderate/severe AR using the original ARIA (o-ARIA) classification and 59.5% had moderate, while 30.5% had severe AR using the m-ARIA criterion. Using the m-ARIA, significantly higher T4SS and VAS scores were obtained when comparing severe with moderate AR. CONCLUSIONS: The m-ARIA severity classification is a useful clinical tool to discriminate moderate from severe AR among untreated pediatric patients.

Allergic fungal sinusitis in children.

Allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS) is a subtype of eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) characterized by type I hypersensitivity, nasal polyposis, characteristic computed tomography scan findings, eosinophilic mucus, and the presence of fungus on surgical specimens without evidence of tissue invasion. This refractory subtype of CRS is of the great interest in the pediatric population, given the relatively early age of onset and the difficulty in managing AFS through commercially available medical regimens. Almost universally, a diagnosis of AFS requires operative intervention. Postoperative adjuvant medical therapy is a mainstay in the treatment paradigm of pediatric AFS.

Autonomic dysfunction and clinical severity of disease in children with allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVES: The involvement of autonomic imbalance has been reported in the pathogenesis of allergic diseases. PURPOSE: To investigate the association between the clinical severity of childhood allergic rhinitis and autonomic nervous system (ANS) dysfunction, to define whether the severity of disease correlates with ANS activity. METHODS: In this cross-sectional, case-control study, we evaluated the ANS testing by measuring sympathetic skin response (SRR) and heart rate (R-R) interval variation (RRIV) in 55 children with perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR), aged 7-12 yrs without any chronic co-morbidity, and the results were compared with 40 sex- and age-matched control subjects. The patients were divided into two groups according to the severity of allergic rhinitis. RESULTS: There were significant increase in calculated RRIV variables during at rest and deep breathing in children with PAR compared to controls, which reflect parasympathetic nervous system (PNS) activity (p<0.005). The mean amplitude of SSR in patients, which reflect sympathetic nervous system (SNS) activity was smaller compared with the controls, but this difference was not significant (0.61±0.35 µV vs controls 0.94±0.46, p>0.05). Lower RRIV and the prolonged SSR latencies in children with AR were closely correlated with disease severity (r=-0.65, p<0.05, and r=-0.59, p<0.05 respectively). CONCLUSION: Combined use of these two tests, allows separate testing of PNS and SNS function, and are very sensitive methods in assessing of severity of disease in children with PAR.

The impact of allergic rhinitis on symptoms, and quality of life using the new criterion of ARIA severity classification.

INTRODUCTION: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common disease with major socieconomic burden and a significant impact on quality of life. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to assess the impact of AR severity, using the modified ARIA (m-ARIA) severity criterion in order to discriminate among moderate and severe AR, in symptoms and quality of life assessed with the questionnaire ESPRINT-15. METHODS: The specific quality of life questionnaire (ESPRINT-15) was applied in over thousand untreated RA patients. Severity was evaluated by the m-ARIA classification, which categorizes AR as mild, moderate, and severe. Nasal symptoms were evaluated by using categorized (none, low, middle, and high) Total Four Symptom Score (T4SS). RESULTS: Using the m-ARIA severity classification, significant differences in quality of life, both global score and specific domains, and categorized T4SS were found among the AR severity groups. CONCLUSION: Modified ARIA severity classification in mild, moderate, and severe allergic rhinitis clearly discriminates the impact of AR in all domains of quality of life and categorized symptom`s score.

Examination, diagnosis and classification for Japanese allergic rhinitis: Japanese guideline.

Many countries throughout the world have experienced an increase in the prevalence of allergic rhinitis (AR), which has come to be a major cause of morbidity in developed countries. The pathology underlying AR is regarded as IgE-mediated type I allergy characterized by mucosal inflammation that occurs in response to allergen exposure. In Japan, AR caused by Japanese cedar pollen, the most common allergic disease, has become a salient public health challenge. Almost all primary care physicians and otorhinolaryngologists have been consulted by AR patients between February and April. Although most such patients have received treatment, numerous patients with AR have not received proper examinations for AR. Clinical guidelines are systematically developed statements that are designed to help practitioners make decisions about appropriate and effective health care. Guidelines in many countries including Japan have been published for AR. Unfortunately, those guidelines have remained untested. Moreover, they might be difficult for non-specialists to use. In this review, we specifically examine the present standard examination for diagnosis of AR and optimal classification for AR in Japan. We hope that this review would be used not only for the support of daily practice but also for selection of AR patients for clinical trials.

Phenotyping of allergic rhinitis.

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is characterized by immune-mediated inflammation of the nasal mucosal lining. Although this chronic disease is not fatal, it is associated with many debilitating symptoms. Like many other chronic diseases, AR has a wide range of clinical aspects, and comorbidities such as asthma, rhinosinusitis, dermatitis, and conjunctivitis may accompany the disease to different degrees. These comorbidities and features determine the clinical phenotypes of AR. Different phenotypes and other characteristics of AR are discussed in this review. It is important for clinicians to be aware of these variable clinical phenotypes of AR to diagnose and treat the disease properly.

Chronic rhinosinusitis: epidemiology and medical management.

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) affects 12.5% of the US population. On epidemiologic grounds, some association has been found between CRS prevalence and air pollution, active cigarette smoking, secondhand smoke exposure, perennial allergic rhinitis, and gastroesophageal reflux. The majority of pediatric and adult patients with CRS are immune competent. Data on genetic associations with CRS are still sparse. Current consensus definitions subclassify CRS into CRS without nasal polyposis (CRSsNP), CRS with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP), and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS). Evaluation and medical management of CRS has been the subject of several recent consensus reports. The highest level of evidence for treatment for CRSsNP exists for saline lavage, intranasal steroids, and long-term macrolide antibiotics. The highest level of evidence for treatment of CRSwNP exists for intranasal steroids, systemic glucocorticoids, and topical steroid irrigations. Aspirin desensitization is beneficial for patients with aspirin-intolerant CRSwNP. Sinus surgery followed by use of systemic steroids is recommended for AFRS. Other modalities of treatment, such as antibiotics for patients with purulent infection and antifungal drugs for patients with AFRS, are potentially useful despite a lack of evidence from controlled treatment trials. The various modalities of medical treatment are reviewed in the context of recent consensus documents and the author's personal experience.

Differences and similarities between allergic and nonallergic rhinitis in a large sample of adult patients with rhinitis symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) may present with different clinical and laboratory characteristics. METHODS: A total of 1,511 consecutive patients, aged 18-81 years, diagnosed with rhinitis, 56% females and 44% males, underwent complete allergic evaluation including skin prick test, blood eosinophil counts, nasal eosinophil counts, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) measurement and evaluation of nasal symptoms using a visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: A total of 1,107 patients (73%)had AR, whereas 404 (27%) had NAR. Patients with NAR were older and predominantly female. A higher nasal eosinophils count was associated with AR and a lack of clinical response to antihistamines. AR patients had more sneezing and nasal pruritus, whereas NAR was characterized mainly by nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea. AR patients had more severe symptoms and recurrent conjunctivitis, whereas NAR patients had slightly more frequent episodes of recurring headaches as well as olfactory dysfunction. PNIF, blood eosinophil counts and VAS of nasal symptoms were higher in patients with AR. In a final logistic regression model, 10 variables were statistically different between AR and NAR: age [OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.96-0.98)], sneezing [OR 4.09 (95% CI 2.78-6.00)], nasal pruritus [OR 3.84 (95% CI 2.60-5.67)], mild symptoms [OR 0.21 (95% CI 0.09-0.49)], intermittent/severe nasal symptoms [OR 3.66 (95% CI 2.06-6.50)], VAS [OR 1.06 (95% CI 1.04-1.08)], clinical response to antihistamines [OR 22.59 (95% CI 13.79-37.00)], conjunctivitis [OR 4.49 (95% CI 2.86-7.05)], PNIF [OR 1.01 (95% CI 1.00-1.01)] and nasal eosinophil counts [OR 1.14 (95% CI 1.10-1.18)]. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed high predictive accuracy for a model including these variables independently of the diagnosis of AR/NAR (cutoff <0.74). CONCLUSIONS: We showed that the several clinical and laboratory parameters reported above may help to reinforce or exclude the diagnosis of AR obtained with skin prick test.

[The approaches to diagnostics and therapy of allergic rhinitis].

Allergic rhinitis is a common disease of great socio-economic significance. The treatment of this condition is carried out on an individual basis depending on the clinical course of the disease; it includes prevention of contacts with the allergen, medicamental and immunotherapy. The principal pharmaceuticals used to treat the patients include oral and intranasal H1 anti-histaminic preparations, intranasal corticosteroids, intranasal cromones, anti-leukotrien agents, and specific subcutaneous immunotherapy. Glencet (levocetirizine) is one of the modern antihistaminic preparations of the second generation having an advantage over other drugs for the treatment of allergic rhinitis in that it may be prescribed to the patients presenting with concomitant bronchial asthma and cardiac diseases.

Clinical features of allergic rhinitis and skin prick test analysis based on the ARIA classification: a preliminary study in Malaysia.

INTRODUCTION: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent disease worldwide but is still underdiagnosed in many parts of Asia. We studied the clinical profiles of AR patients in our community based on the new ARIA classification and investigated the aetiological allergens using a skin prick test. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 2008, 142 newly diagnosed patients with AR were seen and underwent skin prick testing with 90 patients completing the study. RESULTS: Intermittent mild and moderate/severe AR were evident in 10% and 21.1% of the patients, while persistent mild and moderate/severe were seen in 20% and 48.9%, respectively. Rhinitis and asthma co-morbidity occurred in 28.8% with asthma incidence significantly higher in persistent AR (P = 0.002). There was no significant association between AR severity, city living and asthma co-morbidity. Nasal itchiness and sneezing were the main presenting complaints and were more common in intermittent AR (P <0.05). Sleep disturbance was associated with moderate-severe AR (P <0.05). Polypoidal mucosa was associated with asthma co-morbidity (P <0.05). Monosensitivity reaction occurred in 12.2% of patients and was associated with fungi sensitivity (P <0.05). Majority of patients were oligosensitive (52.8%) and polysensitive (34.4%) and were significantly associated with moderate-severe persistent AR (P <0.01). The highest positive skin prick reaction and the largest average wheal diameter were for the house dust mites and cat allergen (P <0.05). CONCLUSION: Our results reflected the AR profiles in our country, which was comparable with typical profiles of the neighbouring country and other Mediterranean countries with a similar temperate climate.

Validation of ARIA duration and severity classifications in Spanish allergic rhinitis patients - The ADRIAL cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an increasingly prevalent worldwide disease, which has an important impact on quality of life and generates high social and health care costs. The ARIA classification, that considers both the duration and severity of AR, seems more appropriate than previous classifications of AR, but few studies exist on the validation of the severity criteria proposed by the ARIA classification. OBJECTIVES: To assess the ARIA duration and severity classification of AR in a large sample population of patients, by investigating whether different degrees of severity correlate with differences in symptom score, quality of life or the patient's self evaluation of impairment. This study also assesses the relationship between AR severity and co morbidities. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An observational, cross-sectional, multicentre study conducted in Spain. AR was classified based on the ARIA criteria, and compared to the classical classification based on allergen exposure. Rhinitis was evaluated by the Total 4-Symptom Score (T4SS) scale, quality of life was measured using the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), and disease severity through a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS, 0-100 mm). Comorbidities were evaluated based both on the duration and severity of the symptoms of rhinitis. RESULTS: AR patients, (n = 3,529; mean age 37.5 +/= 13.4 years; 52.3% women) were included in the study. AR patients were classified as intermittent (51.5%) and persistent (48.5%) based on the ARIA classification, and as seasonal (61.2%), perennial (35.1%), and occupational (3.7%) based on the allergen exposure classification. Significantly higher T4SS, RQLQ and VAS scores were obtained in moderate/severe compared to mild AR. The incidence of asthma was significantly higher in patients with persistent and moderate/severe AR compared to intermittent and mild AR. Asthma was the only co morbidity to reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: ARIA classification of severity reflects two different statuses of AR in terms of symptoms and quality of life. Asthma was the only concomitant pathology in which incidence was related to ARIA categories in terms of duration or severity.

The natural history of allergic rhinitis in childhood.

The distinction between 'seasonal' and 'perennial' allergic rhinitis (AR) is not always adequate. The 'Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma' (ARIA) work group suggested a new classification for AR based on severity and duration of symptoms. Our primary aim was to describe the natural history and burden of AR according to the new ARIA criteria in a population-based birth cohort study of children up to 13 yr. We defined symptoms as 'severe' (impairment of daily activities) or 'mild' (no impairment) and 'persistent' (duration > 1 month) or 'intermittent' (