To investigate epidermal growth factor, transforming growth factor-α and interleukin-8 production in nasal mucosa irrigated with hypertonic 2.3 per cent solution with algae extracts, in comparison to 0.9 per cent NaCl during the first two weeks after surgery for nasal polyposis, in relation to symptoms and local findings.

This prospective study included 20 nasal polyposis patients postoperatively irrigated with hypertonic solution and 20 nasal polyposis patients postoperatively irrigated with isotonic solution. We evaluated nasal symptom score, endoscopic score and mediator levels in nasal secretions before and after irrigation.

Following treatment, nasal symptom score and endoscopic score were significantly lower in the hypertonic solution group (p = 0.023; p < 0.001, respectively). The increase in the epidermal growth factor and the decrease in the transforming growth factor-α and interleukin-8 concentration were higher in the hypertonic group (p < 0.001 for all mediators).

Irrigation with a hypertonic solution was found to be more effective than an isotonic solution in nasal mucosa reparation.

In transnasal endoscopic surgical procedures, the lens of the endoscope often becomes fogged or smeared with mucus or blood. The surgeon has to clean the lens and reintroduce the endoscope multiple times during the surgery, making it a tiring process.

This paper describes an innovative lens irrigation system comprising a modified 16 Fr Foley catheter, a 20 cc or 50 cc syringe filled with warm normal saline (0.9 per cent), and a commercially available intravenous infusion set. The rigid endoscope is introduced into the catheter through the urine draining port. When the lens gets smudged with blood or mucus, the irrigating saline in the syringe is forced through the inflating port.

A clear vision was restored immediately on flushing the syringe. The system did not compromise the operative space or hinder manoeuvrability.

This cost-effective, innovative lens irrigation system saves the time spent in cleaning the lens and enhances operational efficiency, especially in a low-income setting.

Nasal irrigation is commonly performed in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis after functional endoscopic sinus surgery. This study systematically assessed the clinical efficacy of nasal irrigation from the medical literature.

The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched using a comprehensive strategy, limited to English-language articles, published from October 1971 to March 2017, and comprising human subjects.

A total of 824 trials were identified, 5 of which, involving 331 participants, were included in this systematic review. After selection, only three trials were eligible for inclusion in a meta-analysis. Nasal irrigation using normal saline and various solutions was found to be effective in reducing symptom scores and endoscopic scores for chronic rhinosinusitis patients after functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Comparison of outcome measures, such as eosinophil count reduction, revealed that various solutions are more effective than normal saline alone; however, no statistical significance was found in terms of reduced symptom or endoscopic scores.

Based on the current limited evidence, nasal irrigation is an effective therapy for chronic rhinosinusitis patients after functional endoscopic sinus surgery. However, when comparing various solutions with normal saline, no significant difference was found in symptom scores or endoscopic scores.

To assess subjective preference using three nasal hygiene systems: Stérimar Original®, Emcur® and Sinus Rinse™.

We used a prospective, single-blind, randomised, crossover study to compare three nasal hygiene systems: Stérimar Original, Emcur and Sinus Rinse.

Eighteen adult volunteers were recruited and were asked to rate their experience over three days using three well-established nasal hygiene systems. A standard visual analogue scale was used to assess five criteria: (1) simplicity of instructions; (2) ease of use; (3) comfort; (4) perceived nasal clearance (effectiveness) and (5) single best overall system.

Stérimar Original was found to have the easiest instructions to understand compared to the other two systems. There was no significant difference between Stérimar Original and Sinus Rinse with regards to ease of use but they were both significantly easier to use than Emcur (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the three systems when comparing the last three criteria. There was no alteration in preference when the cost of each treatment was disclosed to the subjects, and no significant side effects were reported.

The instructions accompanying Stérimar Original appeared to be the easiest to understand, while Stérimar Original and Sinus Rinse were easier to use than Emcur.