Abstract:Non‐allergic rhinitis is defined as dysfunction and non‐infectious inflammation of the nasal mucosa that is caused by provoking agents other than allergens or microbes. It is common, with an estimated prevalence of around 10% to 20%. Patients experience symptoms of nasal obstruction, anterior rhinorrhoea/post‐nasal drip and sneezing. Several subgroups of non‐allergic rhinitis can be distinguished, depending on the trigger responsible for symptoms; these include occupation, cigarette smoke, hormones, medication, food and age. On a cellular molecular level different disease mechanisms can also be identified. People with non‐allergic rhinitis often lack an effective treatment as a result of poor understanding and lack of recognition of the underlying disease mechanism. Intranasal corticosteroids are one of the most common types of medication prescribed in patients with rhinitis or rhinosinusitis symptoms, including those with non‐allergic rhinitis. However, it is unclear whether intranasal corticosteroids are truly effective in these patients. To assess the effects of intranasal corticosteroids in the management of non‐allergic rhinitis. The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2019, Issue 7); PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 1 July 2019. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intranasal corticosteroids, delivered by any means and in any volume, with (a) placebo/no intervention or (b) other active treatments in adults and children (aged ≥ 12 years). We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were patient‐reported disease severity and a significant adverse effect ‐ epistaxis. Secondary outcomes were (disease‐specific) health‐related quality of life, objective measurements of airflow and other adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. We included 34 studies (4452 participants); however, only 13 studies provided data for our main comparison, intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo. The participants were mainly defined as patients with perennial rhinitis symptoms and negative allergy tests. No distinction between different pheno‐ and endotypes could be made, although a few studies only included a specific phenotype such as pregnancy rhinitis, vasomotor rhinitis, rhinitis medicamentosa or senile rhinitis. Most studies were conducted in a secondary or tertiary healthcare setting. No studies reported outcomes beyond three months follow‐up. Intranasal corticosteroid dosage in the review ranged from 50 μg to 2000 μg daily. Intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo Thirteen studies (2045 participants) provided data for this comparison. These studies used different scoring systems for patient‐reported disease severity, so we pooled the data in each analysis using the standardised mean difference (SMD). Intranasal corticosteroid treatment may improve patient‐reported disease severity as measured by total nasal symptom score compared with placebo at up to four weeks (SMD ‐0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐1.15 to ‐0.33; 4 studies; 131 participants; I 2 = 22%) (low‐certainty evidence). However, between four weeks and three months the evidence is very uncertain (SMD ‐0.24, 95% CI ‐0.67 to 0.20; 3 studies; 85 participants; I 2 = 0%) (very low‐certainty evidence). Intranasal corticosteroid treatment may slightly improve patient‐reported disease severity as measured by total nasal symptom score change from baseline when compared with placebo at up to four weeks (SMD ‐0.15, 95% CI ‐0.25 to ‐0.05; 4 studies; 1465 participants; I 2 = 35%) (low‐certainty evidence) All four studies evaluating the risk of epistaxis showed that there is probably a higher risk in the intranasal corticosteroids group (65 per 1000) compared to placebo (31 per 1000) (risk ratio (RR) 2.10, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.57; 4 studies; 1174 participants; I 2 = 0%) (moderate‐certainty evidence). The absolute risk difference (RD) was 0.04 with a number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) of 25 (95% CI 16.7 to 100). Only one study reported numerical data for quality of life. It did report a higher quality of life score in the intranasal corticosteroids group (152.3 versus 145.6; SF‐12v2 range 0 to 800); however, this disappeared at longer‐term follow‐up (148.4 versus 145.6) (low‐certainty evidence). Only two studies provided data for the outcome objective measurements of airflow. These data could not be pooled because they used different methods of outcome measurement. Neither found a significant difference between the intranasal corticosteroids and placebo group (rhinomanometry SMD ‐0.46, 95% CI ‐1.06 to 0.14; 44 participants; -Abstract Truncated-

Efficiency of Oral Steroids and Steroidal Nasal Spray in Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Comparative Study

Chinese Expert Recommendation on Transnasal Corticosteroid Nebulization for the Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis 2021

Comparison of Intranasal Steroid Application Using Nasal Saline Irrigation and a Mucosal Atomization Device to Treat Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Steroid transnasal nebulization in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis

The Role of Corticosteroid Nasal Irrigations in the Management of Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A State-of-the-Art Systematic Review

Olfaction in chronic rhinosinusitis: comparing two different endonasal steroid application methods

Topical steroids for chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Efficiency of Different Approaches in Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery for Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Comparative Study

A prospective single-arm study on the efficacy and safety of short-course oral corticosteroids followed by topical corticosteroids in patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

Comparison of efficacy of fluticasone propionate versus clarithromycin for postoperative treatment of different phenotypic chronic rhinosinusitis: a randomized controlled trial.

Comparison of intranasal fluticasone spray, budesonide atomizer, and budesonide respules in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with polyposis after endoscopic sinus surgery

Efficacy of EDS-FLU for Chronic Rhinosinusitis: Two Randomized Controlled Trials (ReOpen1 and ReOpen2)

Intranasal corticosteroids for non-allergic rhinitis.

Efficacy of steroid-impregnated spacers after endoscopic sinus surgery in chronic rhinosinusitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Chronic rhinosinusitis: medical versus surgical management

Efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of acute rhinosinusitis

Rhinitis medicamentosa – comparing two treatment strategies: a retrospective analysis

Effect of sodium hyaluronate added to topical corticosteroids in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis

Effect of postoperative systemic prednisolone on short-term and long-term outcomes in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: A multi-centered randomized clinical trial

Comparison of Bioabsorbable Steroid-Eluting Sinus Stents Versus Nasopore after Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled, Single-Blinded Clinical Trial

Double blind randomized controlled trial measuring the efficacy of nebulized steroid at half dose in comparison to high volume squeeze bottle steroid irrigation in management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis