Antihistamines and nasal blockage

Cauwenberge, Paul Van; Wang, Deyun

doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.1997.tb04882.x

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The conventional tomography is effective to evaluate the nasal cavity, since it allows the study of transversal, vertical and sagittal form, concluded, the area and volume increases significantly when performing MRS, with stable changes for three months. In our study, we observed a decrease in the NR in both nostrils, decreasing its value gradually, however, from T3-T4 (2556.35cm 3 /Pa-2997.82cm 3 /Pa) the RN of the right fossa increased, without being statistically significant change [36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Change in Nasal Airflow, Associated with the Treatment of Rapid Maxillary Expansion in Children with Maxillary Compression

Torre-Martinez¹

2019

OPROJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To determine the change of nasal airflow (ANF) in children with maxillary compression after performing rapid expansion treatment. Materials and methods:The sample consisted of 30 patients who attended the Orthodontics Postgraduate Program of the Autonomous University of Nuevo Leon (UANL). They underwent clinical history, study models, lateral cephalogram and orthopantomography. Those who presented maxillary compression were referred to the Regional Center of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (CRAIC) of the University Hospital, UANL., Where a rhinomanometry (T1) was performed to know the values of nasal airflow (NAD) and nasal resistance (RN). before starting the maxillary expansion treatment (ERM). ERM was performed with a Hyrax type expansion screw. Three subsequent registrations were performed with rhinomanometry, the first was one month after starting the ERM (T2), the second to the third month (T3) and the third to the ninth month (T4). Changes in the nasal airflow were compared after of the maxillary rapid expansion, with the student's t test, with p≤0.05, for related samples. Results:The values of the FAN increased as the measurements were made, on the other hand, the RN decreased progressively. The results were not statistically significant from one time to another. We did not find a statistically significant difference in relation to gender, nor to the present symptomatology. The group of 9 to 10 years was especially favored in relation to the two groups of greater age. Conclusion:The treatment of MRS is an effective treatment to relieve maxillary compression, helps improve nasal capacity, increasing FAN and decreasing the NR; however, it is not recommended in order to improve nasal permeability exclusively.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Change in Nasal Airflow, Associated with the Treatment of Rapid Maxillary Expansion in Children with Maxillary Compression

Torre-Martinez¹

2019

OPROJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, both subjective and objective cognitive and psychomotor tests have demonstrated that a very limited number of the second‐generation antihistamines, including ebastine and fexofenadine, are virtually free of sedative effects ( 25). With the exception of astemizole, which has an onset of action of 3 days, most of the new agents have a much more rapid onset of action of 15–180 min ( 26) and a longer duration of activity of 24 h, allowing a once‐daily treatment regimen and better patient compliance ( 27). Moreover, it is also possible to perform dose titration with these drugs (i.e., use at different dosages in different types of patients).…”

Section: H1‐receptor Antagonistsmentioning

confidence: 99%