Endoscopic vidian neurectomy vs turbinoplasty for resistant rhinitis
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A randomised clinical trial comparing the efficacy of endoscopic turbinoplasty and endoscopic vidian neurectomy, in patients with non-allergic rhinitis resistant to intranasal steroid treatment.
IRAS ID
204680
Contact name
Ahmed Eweiss
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals Trust - Department of Research and Innovation
Duration of Study in the UK
3 years, months, days
Research summary
Rhinitis is a common condition, defined as inflammation of the lining of the nose, which leads to a significant quality of life impact. The most common symptoms are nasal blockage, discharge, sneezing, itching and decreased sense of smell. It can be treated medically (usually with nasal steroid sprays or drops), and if this fails, surgically. It may be caused by a defined allergic trigger (e.g. pollen), or may have no identifiable cause. \n\nSurgical treatment for rhinitis for those who do not respond to first-line treatment is applied quite inconsistently, and lacks a firm base of evidence to support it. Endoscopic turbinoplasty is performed to decrease the size of two bulky structures (inferior turbinates) in each nasal cavity, which cause nasal blockage when they swell in rhinitis. It is established in evidence as the most effective turbinate surgical procedure. Endoscopic vidian neurectomy is a procedure which severs the nerve supply which leads to the engorgement of blood vessels and excessive mucus production in the nose.\n\nThis study aims to treat adult patients who have non-allergic rhinitis, which has not responded to nasal steroid sprays, with either 1) endoscopic turbinoplasty, or 2) endoscopic vidian neurectomy, in a randomised fashion. We hope to compare the efficacy of these two procedures in treating patients’ nasal blockage due to their rhinitis, measured over the period of a year.\n\nPatients will be selected from those already undergoing treatment for rhinitis. They offered surgical treatment, and have the risks of the procedures explained in detail. They will be treated at Queen’s Hospital, Romford, UK with one of the two surgical procedures, selected at random. Before and at several intervals after the study they will be examined, and asked to complete questionnaires about their symptoms, with the aim of judging the improvement they experience, and the longevity of the effects.
REC name
London - Hampstead Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
16/LO/1233
Date of REC Opinion
15 Sep 2016
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion