Background Saline nasal lavage is one of the treatments of sinonasal diseases. Evidence from basic research favors hypertonic saline (HS) over isotonic saline (IS) for mucociliary clearance, but evidence from clinical studies is controversial. Conversely, HS may carry greater side effects. Objective To compare the effects of HS and IS nasal irrigation in treating sinonasal diseases. Methods Systematic search with Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar, and Manual additional sources was conducted. Randomized controlled trials comparing HS with IS nasal irrigation in treating any sinonasal diseases, including rhinitis and rhinosinusitis, were included. Data were pooled for meta-analyses. Outcomes were symptom scores, sinonasal outcome test (SNOT), and adverse events. Heterogeneity was explored by subgroup analyses. Results Nine studies (740 patients) were included. HS nasal irrigation brought greater benefits over IS in symptom reduction (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.76, -0.40); however, no difference was shown in SNOT-20 improvement (mean difference 1.81; 95% CI: -0.68, 4.30). In subgroup analyses, effects favoring HS on symptoms were larger in 4 subgroups. These were (1) patients with rhinitis (SMD -1.09; 95% CI: -1.42, -0.76) compared with rhinosinusitis (SMD -0.37; 95% CI: -0.58, -0.15), P < .01; (2) patients under the age of 18 years (SMD -1.22; 95% CI: -1.53, -0.91) compared with patients over the age of 18 years (SMD -0.26; 95% CI: -0.49, -0.04), P < .01; (3) saline irrigation using high volume (SMD -0.89; 95% CI: -1.18, -0.60) compared with low volume (SMD -0.39; 95% CI: -0.62, -0.16), P < .01; and (4) saline irrigation with hypertonicity of <3% (SMD -1.09; 95% CI: -1.42, -0.76) and hypertonicity of 3%-5% (SMD -1.20; 95% CI: -1.61, -0.78) compared with hypertonicity of >5% (SMD 0.20; 95% CI: -0.15, 0.55), P < .01. Buffered saline and operative status did not have impact. HS brought greater minor adverse effects. No major adverse effects were reported. Conclusion HS improves symptoms over IS nasal irrigation in treating sinonasal diseases. There is no difference in disease-specific quality of life. However, HS brings greater minor side effects than IS.

Background In the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence‐based findings and recommendation from the full document. Methods ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence‐based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work. Results ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost. Conclusion The ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment.

Objective: To assess the prognostic factors that predict favorable outcomes of low-dose macrolides (LDMs) in treating chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).Methods: Randomized controlled trials studying the effects of LDMs in treating CRS were included. Data were pooled for meta-analysis. Primary outcome was Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT). Six prognostic factors: CRS subtypes, serum immunoglobulin (Ig)E level, membered lactone ring of macrolides, concurrent endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), and dosage and duration of the LDMs were assessed by subgroup analyses.Results: Ten studies (608 patients) met the inclusion criteria. LDMs and placebo were not different in SNOT improvement (standardized mean difference [SMD] = −0.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.69 to 0.24). Subgroup analyses showed that the effects favored LDMs in the patients with CRS without polyps (SMD = −0.64, 95% CI: −1.01 to −0.27) compared to CRS with polyps, and the patients receiving a half dose (SMD = −0.64, 95% CI: −1.01 to −0.27) compared to a very low dose. There was no difference in SNOT improvement between LDMs plus standard treatment compared to standard treatment (SMD = −0.52, 95% CI: −1.57 to 0.53). Subgroup analyses showed that the effects favored LDMs in the patients receiving LDMs for a duration of 24 weeks (SMD = −1.68, 95% CI: −2.40 to −0.95) compared to 8 and 12 weeks. There was no difference between the 14-membered and 15-membered ring LDMs. Assessment of concurrent ESS found mixed results. Serum IgE level could not be assessed.Conclusions: LDMs provided favorable outcomes in patients with CRS without polyps. A half dose of macrolides should be given for a duration of 24 weeks.