The value of herbal medicines in the treatment of acute non-purulent rhinosinusitis (original) (raw)

Abstract

In a prospective, randomised, double-blinded controlled study, we compared the efficacy and safety of two different treatment options with the herbal medicines cineole and a combination of five different components for acute viral rhinosinusitis. One hundred and fifty patients with acute and viral rhinosinusitis (75 patients in each treatment group) were enrolled. The diagnosis rhinosinusitis was made according to a defined symptoms-sum-score which was based on rhinoscopic and clinical signs which are characteristic for rhinosinusitis. The primary endpoint was the amelioration of the symptoms-sum-score, which includes all relevant characteristics for rhinosinusitis as headache on bending, frontal headache, sensitivity of pressure points of trigeminal nerve, impairment of general condition, nasal obstruction, rhino-secretion, secretion quantity, secretion viscosity and fever in a treatment period of 7 days. The mean reduction of the symptoms-sum-score after 4 days was 6.7 (±3.4) and after 7 days 11.0 (±3.3) in the cineole group and 3.6 (±2.8) after 4 days and 8.0 (±3.0) after 7 days in the control group. The differences between both groups were clinically relevant and statistically significant after 4 and 7 days (P < 0.0001). This result is validated by the amelioration of the secondary endpoints headache on bending, frontal headache, sensitivity of pressure points of trigeminal nerve, impairment of general condition, nasal obstruction and rhino-secretion. These findings correlate with the statistically significant difference of the estimation of B-scan ultrasonography. It is safe to use both medications for 7 days in patients with acute viral rhinosinusitis. Treatment with cineole is clinically relevant and statistically significant, more effective in comparison to the alternative herbal preparation with five different components.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Evans KL (1994) Diagnosis and management of sinusitis. BMJ 309:1415–1422
    PubMed CAS Google Scholar
  2. Lee KJ (ed) (1995) Essential otolaryngology. Head and neck surgery, 6th edn. Appleton & Lange, New York
  3. Dorow P (1989) What influence does cineole have on mucociliary clearance? Therapiewoche 39:2652
    Google Scholar
  4. Juergens UR, Stöber M, Vetter H (1998) Steroid-like inhibition of monocyte arachidonic acid metabolism and IL-1β production by eucalyptole (1.8-cineole). Atemwegs Lungenerkrankungen 24:3–11
    CAS Google Scholar
  5. Kaspar P, Petro W, Swoboda M (1990) Influence of etheric oils on the activity of human cilia. Pneumologie 44:1062
    Google Scholar
  6. Kaspar P, Repges R, Dethlefsen U, Petro W (1994) Comparison of secretolytics. Change of ciliary frequency and lungfunction after therapy with cineole and ambroxol. Atemwegs Lungen-krankheiten 20:605–614
    Google Scholar
  7. Kehrl W, Sonnemann U, Dethlefsen U (2004) Therapy of acute nonpurulent rhinosinusitis with cineole: results of a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Laryngoscope 114:738–742
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
  8. Neubauer N, Maerz RW (1994) Placebo-controlled, randomized double-blind clinical trial with Sinupret, sugar coated tablets on the basis of a therapy with antibiotics and decongestant nasal drops in acute sinusitis. Phytomedicine 1(3):177–181
    Google Scholar
  9. Wei LJ, Lachin JM (1984) Two-sample asymptotically distribution-free tests for incomplete multivariate observations. J Am Stat Assoc 79:653–661
    Article Google Scholar
  10. Federspil P, Wulokow R, Zimmermann Th (1997) Efficacy of myrtol standardized in the therapy of acute sinusitis—results of a double blind, randomised, placebo-controlled multicentre trial. Laryngo-Rhino-Otol 76:23–27
    Article CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20259, Hamburg, Germany
    Stefan Tesche & Frank Metternich
  2. Hermann-Ehlers-Weg 4, 25337, Elmshorn, Germany
    Uwe Sonnemann & Jan-Christian Engelke
  3. MKL Institute of Clinical Research, Pauwelsstr. 19, 52074, Aachen, Germany
    Uwe Dethlefsen

Authors

  1. Stefan Tesche
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  2. Frank Metternich
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  3. Uwe Sonnemann
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  4. Jan-Christian Engelke
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  5. Uwe Dethlefsen
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence toStefan Tesche.

Additional information

This study was funded by a grant of Cassella-med, Cologne, Germany.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tesche, S., Metternich, F., Sonnemann, U. et al. The value of herbal medicines in the treatment of acute non-purulent rhinosinusitis.Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 265, 1355–1359 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-008-0683-z

Download citation

Keywords