Masayoshi Takashima, Randall A Ow, Richard D Thrasher, Ellen M O'Malley, William R Blythe, Omar G Ahmed
Background: The purpose of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to demonstrate that posterior nasal nerve ablation treatment with the NEUROMARK System is superior to a sham control procedure in patients with chronic rhinitis.
Methods: In this prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, superiority RCT, 132 participants were randomized 2:1 to the active treatment arm (88) and sham control arm (44). The primary endpoint was the comparison of the reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS) responder rate between study arms at 90-day follow-up. Secondary efficacy outcomes included postnasal drip, chronic cough, Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE), mini-Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (mini-RQLQ), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) (a depression assessment).
Results: The responder rate was significantly higher for the active treatment arm: 73.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.0%-82.7%) compared to the sham control arm: 35.0% (95% CI, 20.2%-49.8%; p < 0.001). The primary endpoint was met, demonstrating the active treatment arm is superior to the sham control arm. The active treatment arm had significantly greater decreases (improvements) in the rTNSS (-4.0 vs. -1.2, p < 0.0001), postnasal drip (-1.1 vs. -0.3, p < 0.001), cough (-0.9 vs. -0.1, p < 0.001), NOSE score (-32.2 vs. -8.0, p < 0.0001), mini-RQLQ (-1.7 vs. -0.5, p < 0.0001), and PHQ-9 (-3.0 vs. -0.7, p = 0.028), compared to the sham control arm. The NOSE responder rate and mini-RQLQ responder rate were significantly higher for the active treatment arm than the sham control arm (p = 0.001 and p < 0.0001, respectively).
Conclusion: Treatment for chronic rhinitis with the NEUROMARK System is superior to sham control.
背景:本随机对照试验(RCT)的目的是证明使用NEUROMARK系统对慢性鼻炎患者进行后鼻神经消融治疗优于假对照治疗。方法:在这项前瞻性、多中心、单盲、优势随机对照试验中,132名参与者按2:1随机分为积极治疗组(88人)和假对照组(44人)。主要终点是在90天随访中比较研究组间的反射性总鼻症状评分(rTNSS)应答率。次要疗效指标包括后滴鼻、慢性咳嗽、鼻塞症状评估(NOSE)、迷你鼻结膜炎生活质量问卷(mini-RQLQ)和患者健康问卷-9 (PHQ-9)(抑郁评估)。结果:积极治疗组的应答率为73.3%(95%可信区间[CI], 64.0% ~ 82.7%),显著高于假对照组的35.0% (95% CI, 20.2% ~ 49.8%; p < 0.001)。主要终点达到,表明积极治疗组优于假对照组。与假对照组相比,积极治疗组在rTNSS (-4.0 vs. -1.2, p < 0.0001)、后滴鼻(-1.1 vs. -0.3, p < 0.001)、咳嗽(-0.9 vs. -0.1, p < 0.001)、NOSE评分(-32.2 vs. -8.0, p < 0.0001)、mini-RQLQ (-1.7 vs. -0.5, p < 0.0001)和PHQ-9 (-3.0 vs. -0.7, p = 0.028)方面的降低(改善)明显更大。积极治疗组的鼻应答率和mini-RQLQ应答率显著高于假对照组(p分别= 0.001和p < 0.0001)。结论:NEUROMARK系统治疗慢性鼻炎优于假对照。
{"title":"Impedance-Controlled Multipoint Radiofrequency Ablation for Chronic Rhinitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Masayoshi Takashima, Randall A Ow, Richard D Thrasher, Ellen M O'Malley, William R Blythe, Omar G Ahmed","doi":"10.1002/alr.70101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/alr.70101","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to demonstrate that posterior nasal nerve ablation treatment with the NEUROMARK System is superior to a sham control procedure in patients with chronic rhinitis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, superiority RCT, 132 participants were randomized 2:1 to the active treatment arm (88) and sham control arm (44). The primary endpoint was the comparison of the reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS) responder rate between study arms at 90-day follow-up. Secondary efficacy outcomes included postnasal drip, chronic cough, Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE), mini-Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (mini-RQLQ), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) (a depression assessment).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The responder rate was significantly higher for the active treatment arm: 73.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.0%-82.7%) compared to the sham control arm: 35.0% (95% CI, 20.2%-49.8%; p < 0.001). The primary endpoint was met, demonstrating the active treatment arm is superior to the sham control arm. The active treatment arm had significantly greater decreases (improvements) in the rTNSS (-4.0 vs. -1.2, p < 0.0001), postnasal drip (-1.1 vs. -0.3, p < 0.001), cough (-0.9 vs. -0.1, p < 0.001), NOSE score (-32.2 vs. -8.0, p < 0.0001), mini-RQLQ (-1.7 vs. -0.5, p < 0.0001), and PHQ-9 (-3.0 vs. -0.7, p = 0.028), compared to the sham control arm. The NOSE responder rate and mini-RQLQ responder rate were significantly higher for the active treatment arm than the sham control arm (p = 0.001 and p < 0.0001, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Treatment for chronic rhinitis with the NEUROMARK System is superior to sham control.</p>","PeriodicalId":13716,"journal":{"name":"International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145931657","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mark Schuweiler, Wassim Najjar, Murugappan Ramanathan, Andrew P Lane, Leila J Mady, Stella E Lee, Nicholas R Rowan
{"title":"Olfactory Function, Caffeine Intake, and Mortality in a Nationally Representative Cohort.","authors":"Mark Schuweiler, Wassim Najjar, Murugappan Ramanathan, Andrew P Lane, Leila J Mady, Stella E Lee, Nicholas R Rowan","doi":"10.1002/alr.70100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/alr.70100","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13716,"journal":{"name":"International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.8,"publicationDate":"2026-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145931593","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Florent Carsuzaa, Juliette Thariat, Valérie Costes-Martineau, Ludovic de Gabory, Cécile Rumeau, Vincent Patron, Sébastien Vergez, Charles Dupin, Antoine Moya Plana, Justin Michel, Olivier Malard, Xavier Dufour, Benjamin Verillaud, Maxime Fieux, Valentin Favier