PURPOSE: To report a case of pansinusitis after swimming in a common pool.
CASE REPORT: Acute sinusitis is ranked the fifth-most common indication for antibiotic prescriptions.2 Although sinusitis is often diagnosed clinically, cases that are resistant to conventional antibiotic therapy or recurrent cases may require diagnostic imaging in order to confirm the diagnosis. The complications of sinusitis, though rare, may lead to serious consequences if not diagnosed and treated early. We report a 33-year old man with pansinusitis presenting with a sudden onset of peripheral gaze diplopia associated with progressive frontal headache. His symptom resolved completely after he was given intravenous antibiotics and a nasal decongestant.
Objective To objectively compare the nasal decongestion potency of lidocaine/phenylephrine when delivered with a nasal nebulizer and a nasal spray before a rigid nasoendoscopic examination. Study Design Open-label randomized controlled trial. Setting Multicenter study. Methods This prospective clinical trial involved 106 participants with untreated chronic rhinitis. Fifty-three participants had 400 μL of lidocaine/phenylephrine administered into the right nostril with a nasal nebulizer, while the remaining 53 participants had 400 μL administered with a nasal spray. The control was the left nostril. Nasal resistance at 150-Pa fixed pressure was evaluated with an active anterior rhinomanometry at 5, 10, 15, and 30 minutes postintervention. Pain score was assessed subjectively by applying pressure to the inferior turbinate 30 minutes after intervention. Results There was an overall reduction in nasal resistance of the right nostril when lidocaine/phenylephrine was administered with the nasal nebulizer in comparison with the nasal spray. However, a statistically significant difference in nasal resistance was seen only at 5 minutes ( P = .047), 15 minutes ( P = .016), and 30 minutes ( P = .036). The examining endoscopist further supported the degree of nasal decongestion via subjective assessment of the nasal cavity ( P = .001). Pain scores obtained after the intervention showed a significant decrease in pain threshold when the nasal nebulizer was used instead of the nasal spray ( P = .040). Conclusions This study suggests that the delivery of lidocaine/phenylephrine to the nasal cavity by the nasal nebulizer provides better decongestive and analgesic potency as compared with the delivery by nasal sprays.
The aim of this study was to measure craniofacial morphology and nasal respiratory resistance (NRR) in Malay, Indian and Chinese subjects with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). The sample consisted of 34 male subjects, 27-52 years of age (Malay n = 11, which included five mild and six moderate-severe OSA; Indian n = 11, which included six mild and five moderate-severe OSA; and Chinese n = 12, which included six mild and six moderate-severe OSA) diagnosed using overnight polysomnography. After use of a decongestant, NRR was recorded using anterior and posterior rhinomanometry. Standardized lateral cephalometric radiographs were used to record linear and angular dimensions. Malay subjects with moderate-severe OSA had a shorter maxillary (sp-pm) and mandibular (gn-go) length when compared with a mild OSA reference sample (P < 0.05). The hyoid bone was located more caudally in the Chinese moderate-severe subjects (hy-NL, hy-ML)(P < 0.05), and may be a useful diagnostic indicator for severity in this racial group. No pattern of differences for NRR was seen between the moderate-severe and mild OSA subjects. The consistently lower values for nasopharyngeal resistance in all the moderate-severe subjects when compared with the mild group may indicate that some compensation at this level of the airway had taken place. Strong positive correlations between craniocervical angulation (NL/OPT) and total airway resistance and the turbulent component of flow (k(2)) suggest that head posture is sensitive to fluctuations in airway resistance (P < 0.01).