A clinical comparison of intranasal budesonide with beclomethasone dipropionate for perennial non-allergic rhinitis: a 12 month study.

B Synnerstad, N Lindqvist
{"title":"A clinical comparison of intranasal budesonide with beclomethasone dipropionate for perennial non-allergic rhinitis: a 12 month study.","authors":"B Synnerstad,&nbsp;N Lindqvist","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To evaluate possible differences in efficacy and safety between budesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate when used intranasally in the treatment of perennial non-allergic rhinitis, a 12-month open study was undertaken in 24 patients suffering from perennial non-allergic rhinitis. Both drugs were applied intranasally from pressurised aerosols at a daily dosage of 400 micrograms. On entry and at visits after 1, 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12 months, rhinoscopy was performed and the severity of nasal symptoms graded according to a four-point rating scale. All nasal symptoms were reduced from baseline during the treatment period in both groups. Tachyphylaxis was not observed. No clinically significant changes in haematology or blood chemistry parameters were observed in either group, and analysis of plasma cortisol levels revealed no influence of either drug on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Local adverse reactions were uncommon and mild. Budesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate used intranasally at 400 micrograms per day were found to be safe, and budesonide was found to have a significantly higher (p < 0.05) efficacy than beclomethasone dipropionate in alleviating symptoms of perennial non-allergic rhinitis.</p>","PeriodicalId":22312,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of clinical practice","volume":"50 7","pages":"363-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To evaluate possible differences in efficacy and safety between budesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate when used intranasally in the treatment of perennial non-allergic rhinitis, a 12-month open study was undertaken in 24 patients suffering from perennial non-allergic rhinitis. Both drugs were applied intranasally from pressurised aerosols at a daily dosage of 400 micrograms. On entry and at visits after 1, 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12 months, rhinoscopy was performed and the severity of nasal symptoms graded according to a four-point rating scale. All nasal symptoms were reduced from baseline during the treatment period in both groups. Tachyphylaxis was not observed. No clinically significant changes in haematology or blood chemistry parameters were observed in either group, and analysis of plasma cortisol levels revealed no influence of either drug on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Local adverse reactions were uncommon and mild. Budesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate used intranasally at 400 micrograms per day were found to be safe, and budesonide was found to have a significantly higher (p < 0.05) efficacy than beclomethasone dipropionate in alleviating symptoms of perennial non-allergic rhinitis.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
布地奈德鼻内与二丙酸倍氯米松治疗常年性非过敏性鼻炎的临床比较:一项为期12个月的研究。
为了评估布地奈德和二丙酸倍氯米松鼻内治疗常年性非变应性鼻炎的疗效和安全性可能存在的差异,对24例常年性非变应性鼻炎患者进行了为期12个月的开放研究。这两种药物都是通过加压气雾剂鼻内施用,每日剂量为400微克。在入院时和1、2、4、6、9和12个月后就诊时,进行鼻镜检查,并根据四分制对鼻症状的严重程度进行分级。在治疗期间,两组患者的鼻部症状均较基线有所减轻。未观察到快速反应。两组患者的血液学或血液化学参数均未见临床显著变化,血浆皮质醇水平分析显示两种药物均未对下丘脑-垂体-肾上腺轴产生影响。局部不良反应罕见且轻微。布地奈德与二丙酸倍氯米松每天鼻内使用400微克是安全的,并且布地奈德在缓解常年性非变应性鼻炎症状方面的疗效显著高于二丙酸倍氯米松(p < 0.05)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
CANCER PREVENTION. COLIC. Diabetes mellitus. Renal artery stenosis. Tirofiban--spinning the data from fact to hype.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1