We suggest 3 years of sublingual immunotherapy for patients with perennial allergic rhinitis who require immunotherapy and do not accept the subcutaneous route of allergen administration.

No abstract

Background: Both sublingual and subcutaneous immunotherapies have a documented clinical efficacy, but only a few comparative studies have been performed. Objectives: To evaluate and compare the long-term efficacies of subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy. Methods: One hundred and ninety-three patients with house dust mite allergies, out of an original total of 230, were treated with subcutaneous and sublingual house dust mite-specific immunotherapies for 3 years and also observed for 3 years after discontinuation of the treatment. The patients were randomized into 2 groups: the sublingual group (97 patients) and the subcutaneous group (96 patients). The therapy’s success was evaluated using the symptom score, skin prick test results, and the nasal allergen challenge score. The patients were evaluated at the beginning of the study, at the end of years 1, 2, and 3, and also at the end of the 1st and 3rd years after discontinuation of the specific immunotherapy treatment. Results: Immunotherapy induced a significant improvement during the treatment and the follow-up period. We found a greater improvement in the subcutaneous group compared to the sublingual group when we looked at the comparative results of the total 6 years. Conclusion: We suggest subcutaneous immunotherapy for patients with perennial allergic rhinitis due to the better results that were obtained during our study period. Nevertheless, sublingual immunotherapy is now accepted by WHO as a valid alternative to the subcutaneous route and should be used in all patients who require immunotherapy and do not accept the subcutaneous route of allergen administration.

Myiasis has been defined as the infestation of tissue with dipterous larvae that feed on the host's dead or living tissue. A new clinical report of otomyiasis in a 57-year-old woman caused by Wohlfahrtia magnifica was reported. A review of the English language literature reveals 5 articles on otomyiasis cases caused by W. magnifica. Although it is not a frequent manifestation in otorhinolaryngology, the opportunity of its occurrence always exists. In the treatment, a combination of suctioning and alligator forceps was used to remove larvae. Also, tympanoplasty was performed for the reconstruction of perforated ear.

We believe that the results of so large a number of participants in this test will make an obvious contribution to the medical literature.