Hwang, Se Hwan

Abstract Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic therapies for spontaneous epistaxis in hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT). Data Sources PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched up to August 2025. Review Methods Eligible randomized controlled trials evaluating bevacizumab, doxycycline, tranexamic acid, or β‐blockers versus placebo or standard care were included. Outcomes included epistaxis frequency and duration, hemoglobin (Hb), epistaxis severity score (ESS), transfusion or emergent‐care requirements, quality of life (QOL), and adverse events. Results Tranexamic acid did not significantly reduce epistaxis duration or frequency or improve Hb, and it did not change transfusion or emergent‐care needs, but it increased diarrhea (odds ratio 3.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.7; 8.5]). Bevacizumab produced a modest reduction in epistaxis frequency (standardized mean difference −0.25, 95% CI [−0.47; −0.02]), without significant effects on duration, ESS, Hb, or QOL. Doxycycline showed no significant benefit for duration or frequency. Topical or systemic β‐blockers did not significantly affect ESS, QOL, Hb, or overall adverse events. Across agents, between‐study heterogeneity was generally low to moderate and CIs were wide, reflecting limited sample sizes. Conclusion No pharmacologic agent demonstrated consistent, clinically robust superiority over placebo across primary endpoints. Bevacizumab may modestly reduce bleeding burden, whereas tranexamic acid increases gastrointestinal toxicity without clear efficacy. Pharmacologic control of HHT‐related epistaxis remains suboptimal, underscoring the need for adequately powered trials with standardized outcome measures and optimized dosing and delivery strategies.

Background/Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate age-specific effects of intraoperative platelet-rich plasma (PRP) administration on postoperative pain, wound healing, and bleeding after tonsillectomy. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to October 2025. Randomized controlled trials comparing intraoperative PRP with placebo or no treatment in patients undergoing tonsillectomy were included. Data on postoperative pain, wound healing, and bleeding were extracted and analyzed using standardized mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses were performed by age (adults versus children) and by postoperative day. Results: Nine randomized controlled trials comprising 442 participants were included. In adults, PRP significantly reduced postoperative pain (SMD = −1.26 [−1.70 to −0.81]) and improved wound healing (SMD = −1.43 [−2.65 to −0.22]). The analgesic effect was greatest during the early recovery period (postoperative days 0–5) and diminished thereafter. There were no significant differences in primary postoperative bleeding (OR = 0.49 [0.04 to 5.61]) or secondary postoperative bleeding (OR = 0.23 [0.02 to 2.16]) between the PRP and control groups. In children, PRP did not significantly affect pain or bleeding outcomes. Conclusions: Intraoperative PRP may reduce early postoperative pain and may promote mucosal recovery in adults. However, its clinical efficacy in children remains unclear. Further well-designed, age-stratified trials are warranted to clarify the role of PRP in enhancing postoperative recovery.

An exhalation delivery system for fluticasone (EDS-FLU) is designed to deposit drug into sinonasal regions above the inferior turbinate, particularly sinus drainage pathways not reached by standard nasal steroid sprays. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of EDS-FLU for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). We reviewed four independent randomized controlled trials derived from three published articles identified through searches of PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to April 2024. Outcomes included 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores, nasal symptom scores, nasal polyp scores, patient global impression of change (PGIC), responder and surgical indication rates, and adverse events. Compared with EDS-placebo, EDS-FLU produced greater reductions in nasal polyp scores and SNOT-22 scores over 6 months. At 3 months, nasal congestion, facial pain, rhinorrhea, and olfactory dysfunction improved more with EDS-FLU, and PGIC responder and complete response rates were higher at 3 and 6 months. EDS-FLU reduced surgical indication and increased overall responder rates at 3 months but not at 6 months. Epistaxis and nasal septal erosion or ulceration occurred more frequently with EDS-FLU, whereas rates of headache, nasal congestion, nasopharyngitis, and upper respiratory infection were similar between groups. EDS-FLU provides clinically meaningful improvements in subjective and objective outcomes in CRS but is associated with an increased risk of local nasal adverse events, warranting individualized risk-benefit assessment.

ABSTRACT Objectives Xylitol, a low‐permeability sugar alcohol, is recommended for treating chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) due to its ability to decrease liquid salt concentration at the airway surface. This study investigated the efficacy of xylitol nasal irrigation for the management of CRS and its postoperative care. Methods We analysed 7 studies with 263 participants after reviewing the studies that were retrieved from PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to December 2024. Those comparing changes in endoscopic score, Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT), Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE), olfactory dysfunction, and CRS‐related visual analogue scale from baseline to post‐treatment between xylitol and normal saline nasal irrigation groups were analysed. Results Nasal irrigation with xylitol significantly improved sinonasal well‐being in CRS patients compared to irrigation with saline (SMD 0.6253, 95% CI [0.0067; 1.2438]; I 2 = 0.0%). Patients who underwent endoscopic sinus surgery showed substantial SNOT improvement (SMD 3.1284, 95% CI [0.5229; 5.7338]; I 2 = 86.1%), while no significant changes were observed in non‐ESS patients (SMD 0.2571, 95% CI [−0.4872; 1.0014]). The xylitol group also showed significant improvements in NOSE (SMD 0.5976, 95% CI [0.2297; 0.9656]; I 2 = 49.3%) and SNOT scores (SMD 0.3608, 95% CI [0.0724; 0.6493]; I 2 = 49.1%). However, there were no significant changes in endoscopic scoring (SMD 0.1309, 95% CI [−0.1777; 0.4396]; I 2 = 0.0%), olfaction (SMD −0.0292, 95% CI [−0.3633; 0.3050]; I 2 = 0.0%), or saccharine clearance time (SMD 0.3816, 95% CI [−0.3816; 1.1449]; I 2 = 61.6%). Xylitol irrigation was well tolerated, with minimal, transient side effects and no significant adverse events. Conclusion Nasal irrigation with xylitol significantly improves the subjective management of CRS and postoperative care compared to saline irrigation but does not alter objective outcomes.

Objectives. Allergic rhinitis (AR) can substantially compromise daily functioning and well-being, and many patients require more than a single agent to obtain satisfactory symptom control. This study examined whether adding montelukast to antihistamine could manage AR symptoms and quality-of-life outcomes effectively.Methods. A review was performed in PubMed, Embase, Medline, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar to identify eligible studies reported through April 2025. Eligible studies compared combination therapy with montelukast plus antihistamine against antihistamine monotherapy and reported nasal symptoms or rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) scores. Treatment effects were further examined by antihistamine class.Results. Fifteen studies including 2,882 subjects were analyzed. Combination therapy significantly improved daytime nasal symptoms (standardized mean difference [SMD] [95% CI], 0.44 [0.21–0.67]), nighttime nasal symptoms (0.12 [0.01–0.23]), and RQLQ scores (0.14 [0.00–0.27]) versus monotherapy. Individual nasal or ocular symptoms, sneezing, nasal obstruction, and rhinorrhea improved significantly, while nasal itching and ocular symptoms did not. Combinations with desloratadine and levocetirizine showed greater benefits than those with loratadine or fexofenadine.Conclusion. Montelukast–antihistamine combination therapy reduced overall symptoms and improved quality of life versus antihistamine monotherapy. The magnitude of benefit appears to vary depending on the specific antihistamine used, highlighting the possible value of individualized treatment strategies in the treatments of AR.

Objectives: Novel biomechanics of the exhalation delivery system can deliver fluticasone (EDS-FLU; XHANCE) to sinonasal areas above the inferior turbinate, especially sinus drainage pathways not reached by standard nasal sprays. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of EDS-FLU in treating chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Methods: Studies were retrieved from PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to April 2024. We analyzed 5 studies that compared EDS-FLU with a control group (exhalation delivery system with placebo) on various outcomes, including the 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22), nasal symptom scores (congestion, facial pain, olfactory dysfunction, and rhinorrhea), nasal polyp scores, surgical indication rate, and the incidence of adverse effects. Results: Five studies with 2129 patients were included. EDS-FLU significantly improved SNOT-22 score (−20.9657 [−23.5639; −18.3674]) and the polyp score (−1.5099 [−1.7810; −1.2388]) after 6 months. The incidence of epistaxis was significantly higher in the treatment group compared to the control group (OR = 5.7954 [2.1004; 15.9909]). Effects of EDS-FLU on polyp score (−0.6497 [−0.8186; −0.4807]), responder rate (OR = 2.1755 [1.2784; 3.7020]), complete responder rate (OR = 2.0423 [1.0109; 4.1262]), surgical indication rate (OR = 0.7313 [0.5459; 0.9797]), and SNOT-22 score (−6.1513 [−11.3054; −0.9972]) were significantly higher in the treatment group than in the control group. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that EDS-FLU (372 µg twice daily) produced statistically significant improvements compared to EDS-placebo in multiple subjective and objective outcomes, although some adverse effects, such as epistaxis, may occur.

Abstract Objective Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) is characterized by type I immunoglobulin E (IgE)‐mediated hypersensitivity reactions to fungal antigens. This systematic review and meta‐analysis assessed the efficacy of biologics in the management of refractory AFRS. Data Sources PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane. Review Methods Changes in Sino‐Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT)‐22 scores, endoscopic findings, serum eosinophil count, and total IgE levels were assessed in patients with refractory AFRS after receiving biologic therapy. Subgroup analyses were conducted to evaluate the individual efficacy of each biologic agent, including dupilumab, mepolizumab, and omalizumab. Results A total of 60 patients from 6 studies were analyzed. Biologics showed a significant improvement in SNOT‐22 scores (standard mean difference 1.1607 [95% CI 0.5549; 1.7664]), endoscopic scores (2.1953 [1.4181; 2.9725]), serum eosinophil count (1.1649 [0.7735; 1.5563]), and total IgE level (1.0700 [0.4052; 1.7348]). Dupilumab, mepolizumab, and omalizumab all enhanced SNOT‐22 and endoscopic scores. Additionally, dupilumab significantly reduced total IgE levels (1.2981 [0.4063; 2.1900]), whereas both dupilumab (0.9274 [0.1592; 1.6957]) and mepolizumab (1.2324 [0.9215; 1.5433]) significantly lowered the serum eosinophil counts. Conclusion The agents significantly improved nasal symptoms, laboratory findings, and endoscopic scores. These findings support the potential role of biologics as a therapeutic option for patients with AFRS who are unresponsive to conventional treatments.

AbstractObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical efficacy of vidian neurectomy (VN) or posterior nasal neurectomy (PNN) combined with endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP).Data SourcesA systematic search of six databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Cochrane) was conducted to identify relevant studies up to May 2024.Review MethodsThe effects of combining VN or PNN with ESS were evaluated in comparison to ESS alone. Outcomes were assessed by evaluating changes in Lund‐Kennedy score, patient‐reported symptom scores (VAS), quality of life, as well as adverse effects and recurrence rate of CRSwNP.ResultsA total of 6 studies, comprising 407 patients, were included in the analysis. The neurectomy group showed significant improvements in Lund‐Kennedy score (SMD = 0.7276 [0.5695; 0.8857]), with statistically significant improvements maintained at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. The treatment group maintained better improvements in sinusitis‐related quality of life (SMD = 0.4540 [0.1784; 0.7297]) and VAS (SMD = 0.7096 [0.4356; 0.9837]) until 12 months postoperatively, but not at 24 months. Regarding adverse effects, additional neurectomy did not significantly induce epistaxis (odds ratio [OR] = 0.9806 [0.2348; 4.0960]) or dry eye (OR = 2.4194 [0.1114; 52.5255]) compared to the control group. On the other hand, there was no difference in the recurrence rate of CRSwNP between the 2 groups during the follow‐up periods.ConclusionAdditional neurectomy shows better efficacy in improving endoscopic findings and symptoms in patients with CRSwNP and appears to be a safe and effective treatment.

Background and Objectives: We investigated the effects of using a BiZact™ device for tonsillectomy on operating time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative bleeding rate, and pain through a meta-analysis of the relevant literature. Materials and Methods: We reviewed studies retrieved from the databases of PubMed, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane up to March 2024. The results were analyzed following PRISMA guidelines. Six studies that compared the outcomes of patients receiving perioperative BiZact™ tonsillectomy with those in control groups (cold steel dissection or bipolar tonsillectomy) were included for this analysis of the outcomes, which included intraoperative bleeding and time, postoperative pain, and frequency of postoperative bleeding. Results: The operative time (SMD −11.5985, 95%CI [−20.3326; −2.8644], I2 = 99.5%) in the treatment group was significantly reduced compared to the control group. However, BiZact™ showed no significant efficacy in reducing intraoperative bleeding when compared with the control group (SMD −0.0480, 95%CI [−1.8200; 1.7240], I2 = 98.6%). Postoperative pain on day 1 (SMD −0.0885, 95%CI [−0.4368; 0.2598], I2 = 98.9%), day 3 (SMD −0.2118, 95%CI [−0.6110; 0.1873], I2 = 99.5%), and later than day 7 (SMD 0.0924, 95%CI [−0.2491; 0.4338], I2 = 98.6%) in the treatment group was not significantly reduced relative to the control group. When compared to the control group, BiZact™ did not reduce the incidence of secondary postoperative bleeding control in the operation room (OR 0.5711, 95%CI [0.2476; 1.3173], I2 = 32.1%), primary bleeding (OR 0.4514, 95%CI [0.0568; 3.5894], I2 = 0.0%), or all postoperative bleeding events (OR 0.8117, 95%CI [0.5796; 1.1368], I2 = 26.3%). Conclusions: This study demonstrated that using the BiZact™ device for tonsillectomy significantly decreased the operative time but could not effectively reduce intraoperative bleeding or postoperative pain and bleeding.