OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of peri-operative tranexamic acid versus no therapy or placebo on operative parameters in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (with or without nasal polyps) who are undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS).

SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 10 February 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intravenous, oral or topical tranexamic acid with no therapy or placebo in the treatment of patients (adults and children) with chronic rhinosinusitis, with or without nasal polyps, undergoing FESS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcome measures were surgical field bleeding score (e.g. Wormald or Boezaart grading system), intraoperative blood loss and significant adverse effects (seizures or thromboembolism within 12 weeks of surgery). Secondary outcomes were duration of surgery, incomplete surgery, surgical complications and postoperative bleeding (placing of packing or revision surgery) in the first two weeks after surgery. We performed subgroup analyses for methods of administration, different dosages, different forms of anaesthesia, use of thromboembolic prophylaxis and children versus adults. We evaluated each included study for risk of bias and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 studies in the review, with a total of 942 participants. Sample sizes in the included studies ranged from 10 to 170. All but two studies included adult patients (≥ 18 years). Two studies included children. Most studies had more male patients (range 46.6% to 80%). All studies were placebo-controlled and four studies had three treatment arms. Three studies investigated topical tranexamic acid; the other studies reported the use of intravenous tranexamic acid. For our primary outcome, surgical field bleeding score measured with the Boezaart or Wormald grading score, we pooled data from 13 studies. The pooled result demonstrated that tranexamic acid probably reduces the surgical field bleeding score, with a standardised mean difference (SMD) of -0.87 (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.23 to -0.51; 13 studies, 772 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A SMD below -0.70 represents a large effect (in either direction). Tranexamic acid may result in a slight reduction in blood loss during surgery compared to placebo with a mean difference (MD) of -70.32 mL (95% CI -92.28 to -48.35 mL; 12 studies, 802 participants; low-certainty evidence). Tranexamic acid probably has little to no effect on the development of significant adverse events (seizures or thromboembolism) within 24 hours of surgery, with no events in either group and a risk difference (RD) of 0.00 (95% CI -0.02 to 0.02; 8 studies, 664 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, there were no studies reporting significant adverse event data with a longer duration of follow-up. Tranexamic acid probably results in little difference in the duration of surgery with a MD of -13.04 minutes (95% CI -19.27 to -6.81; 10 studies, 666 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Tranexamic acid probably results in little to no difference in the incidence of incomplete surgery, with no events in either group and a RD of 0.00 (95% CI -0.09 to 0.09; 2 studies, 58 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and likely results in little to no difference in surgical complications, again with no events in either group and a RD of 0.00 (95% CI -0.09 to 0.09; 2 studies, 58 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), although these numbers are too small to draw robust conclusions. Tranexamic acid may result in little to no difference in the likelihood of postoperative bleeding (placement of packing or revision surgery within three days of surgery) (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.02; 6 studies, 404 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no studies with longer follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of oral or intranasal aspirin desensitisation, as monotherapy or as adjunctive therapy, in adults with NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease.

SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Ear Nose and Throat (ENT) Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT and Airways Trials Registers; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 10 February 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that compared ATAD with placebo were eligible. We included studies of adults with NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease (i.e. intolerance to NSAID established, e.g. by aspirin challenge test), with chronic rhinosinusitis or asthma, or both. Participants had to be followed up for at least three months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. The primary outcomes were health-related quality of life, asthma control, and significant serious and non-serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were changes in airway assessments, nasal endoscopy score, medication use, symptom scores, and chronic rhinosinusitis and asthma exacerbations (description of exacerbation for which systemic corticosteroid or sinus surgery was needed). We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS: We included five studies with a total of 211 participants (146 analysed). All studies compared oral ATAD at different dosages with placebo and were performed in tertiary care centres. All participants had a diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. In four studies, participants also had a confirmed diagnosis of asthma and two studies reported that participants had previous surgery for nasal polyps. Outcomes were analysed at six and 36 months follow-up. However, only one study reported data for 36 months follow-up. All but one study reported source of funding. Mid-term follow-up (six months, ATAD versus placebo) ATAD may improve health-related quality of life, assessed with Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT) scores (mean difference (MD) -0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.76 to -0.31; 3 studies, 85 participants; minimum clinically important difference (MCID) 9.0 points for total score; low-certainty evidence). In this analysis, SNOT-22 scores were divided by 22 and SNOT-20 scores were divided by 20. The mean reduction (11.9 points) in SNOT score (based on SNOT-22) is larger than the MCID. It is uncertain if asthma control may be improved after ATAD. Asthma control was measured using the Asthma Control Test (ACT) in one study and the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) in another study, so data were not pooled. The MD on the ACQ was -2.00 (total score 0 to 6) (95% CI -4.30 to 0.30; 1 study, 15 participants; MCID 0.5 points; very low-certainty evidence). The MD on the ACT was 5.90 (total score 5 to 25) (95% CI 2.93 to 8.87; 1 study, 30 participants; MCID 3 points; very low-certainty evidence). All but one study reported on adverse events. Seven participants in the active treatment group developed a gastrointestinal disorder and dropped out (129 participants, very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of ATAD on nasal airflow, measured by peak nasal inspiratory flow scores (MD 32.90 L/min, 95% CI -12.44 to 78.24; 1 study, 15 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain if the dosage of intranasal or inhaled corticosteroids may be reduced with ATAD (inhaled corticosteroids: -1197.60 µg, 95% CI -1744.93 to -650.27; intranasal corticosteroids: -120.50 µg, 95% CI -206.49 to -34.51; 1 study; 15 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Symptom scores may not differ between ATAD and placebo, but the evidence is very uncertain (sneezing: MD -0.70, 95% CI -1.45 to 0.05; smell: MD -2.20, 95% CI -4.74 to 0.34; nasal blockage: MD -0.90, 95% CI -1.90 to 0.10; 1 study, very low-certainty evidence). No study assessed nasal endoscopy at this time point. Long-term follow-up (36 months, ATAD versus placebo) ATAD may improve quality of life, as measured with the Rhinosinusitis Disability Index (RSDI) score (MD-18.10, 95% CI -32.82 to -3.38; 1 study; 31 participants; low-certainty evidence). ATAD may result in little to no difference in the size of nasal polyps (MD -1.20, 95% CI -2.72 to 0.32; 1 study, 31 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No adverse events were reported in either group over the total study period of 36 months (1 study; 31 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Data on peak nasal inspiratory flow, changes in dosage of inhalation or intranasal corticosteroids and symptom scores were not reported at this time point.