Dataset Information

History of allergic rhinitis and risk of asthma; a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Allergic rhinitis has been suspected to be a risk factor for asthma in several studies but this association is not firmly established. The objective of this study was to synthesize the evidence of the association between allergic rhinitis and the risk of asthma through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

We performed a search in Medline, Scopus, ISI Proceedings databases and other databases from inception until February 2019, followed by manual search to identify potentially relevant case-control and cohort studies that reported relative risk estimates and confidence intervals of the association between allergic rhinitis and asthma. Cross-sectional studies were excluded. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed and random effects models and quality of studies was assessed through a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

Results

Twenty-nine eligible studies, 22 cohort and 7 case-control studies, with a total of 274489 subjects, were included in the meta-analysis. The results show that history of allergic rhinitis is significantly associated with the occurrence of asthma (OR = 3.82; 95% CI: 2.92-4.99). European studies showed a stronger association (OR = 4.35; (95% CI: 3.12-6.06) than non-European studies (OR = 2.75; 95% CI: 2.16-3.50), and case-control studies showed a stronger association (OR = 4.71; 95% CI: 3.58-6.17) than cohort studies (OR = 3.42; 95% CI: 2.60-4.50).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis shows that allergic rhinitis is strongly associated with asthma. Further prospective studies on the effect of treatment of allergic rhinitis on the development of asthma are needed. Relief of airway allergic manifestations may need dual control of allergic rhinitis and asthma.

Registration

PROSPERO database with registration number CRD42017055156.

SUBMITTER: Tohidinik HR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6807062 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

History of allergic rhinitis and risk of asthma; a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Tohidinik Hamid Reza HR Mallah Narmeen N Takkouche Bahi B

The World Allergy Organization journal 20191017 10

<h4>Background</h4>Allergic rhinitis has been suspected to be a risk factor for asthma in several studies but this association is not firmly established. The objective of this study was to synthesize the evidence of the association between allergic rhinitis and the risk of asthma through a systematic review and meta-analysis.<h4>Methods</h4>We performed a search in Medline, Scopus, ISI Proceedings databases and other databases from inception until February 2019, followed by manual search to iden ...[more]

PMID: 31660100

Similar Datasets

Project description:Herbal medicine is popularly used among patients who suffer from allergic rhinitis. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of single medicinal plants in the management of allergic rhinitis. We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science for randomised controlled trials which evaluated the use of single medicinal plant for allergic rhinitis among adults and children. Twenty-nine randomised controlled trials (n = 1879) were eligible while 27 (n = 1769) contributed data for meta-analyses. Most studies (studies = 20) compared medicinal plants against placebo and Petasites hybridus was most frequently investigated (studies = 5). Very-low-to-low-certainty evidence suggests that compared to placebo, single medicinal plants may improve overall total nasal symptoms (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.02; participants = 249; studies = 5; I2 = 21%) especially nasal congestion and sneezing; and rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life (RQLQ) scores (MD -0.46, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.07; participants = 148; studies = 3; I2 = 0%). Moderate-certainty evidence show no clear differences between single medicinal plants and antihistamine in overall symptoms (Total nasal symptoms: SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.18; participants = 149; studies = 2; I2 = 0%). As adjunctive therapy, moderate-certainty evidence shows that medicinal plants improved SNOT-22 scores when given as intranasal treatment (MD -7.47, 95% CI -10.75 to -4.18; participants = 124; studies = 2; I2 = 21%). Risk of bias domains were low or not clearly reported in most studies while heterogeneity was substantial in most pooled outcomes. Route of administration and age were identified to be plausible source of heterogeneity for certain outcomes. Medicinal plants appear to be well tolerated up to 8 weeks of use. Clear beneficial evidence of medicinal plants for allergic rhinitis is still lacking. There is a need for improved reporting of herbal trials to allow for critical assessment of the effects of each individual medicinal plant preparation in well-designed future clinical studies.

Project description:IntroductionAllergic rhinitis (AR) is a common allergic disorder that impairs social and physical functioning as well as quality of life. It is characterized by sneezing, rhinorrhea, congestion, and itching which respond suboptimally to drug therapy. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive properties that have shown promise in some studies. We aimed to systematically review LLLT's effectiveness in treating AR and meta-analyze our findings.MethodsA systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted on November 24, 2023. All studies investigating LLLT on AR were included, and a pre-post meta-analysis of nasal symptoms (rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing) in the LLLT-treated arm was conducted. Rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) scores before and after LLLT were also meta-analyzed alongside a pairwise meta-analysis of LLLT with placebo, acupuncture, steroids/antihistamines, and ultraviolet lasers. A random-effects model was used with a conservative pre-post correlation of 0.4 and standardized mean difference (SMD) as the effect size.ResultsSixteen studies were included in this review, and we found that nasal symptoms are alleviated post-LLLT in people with AR (SMD: -1.4, 95 CI: [-2.07 to -1.13], p value <0.001). RQLQ scores were also reduced after LLLT (SMD = -0.72, 95 CI: [-0.94 to -0.50], p value <0.001), and very few adverse events were reported. This meta-analysis, however, had significant publication bias and heterogeneity. When compared to a placebo, LLLT did not significantly improve nasal symptoms (SMD: -0.69, p value = 0.167), which might mean the post-LLLT nasal symptom alleviation is due to a placebo effect. Comparisons to other treatment modalities were too few to deduce anything meaningful, although it does appear that LLLT is less effective than UV lasers.ConclusionLLLT is most likely effective at alleviating nasal symptomology and has a low likelihood of adverse event incidence, yet more high-quality studies with larger sample sizes are needed to compare LLLT to a placebo to ensure its superiority to the placebo effect, as well as non-inferiority clinical trials to compare it to standard treatments.

Dataset Information

History of allergic rhinitis and risk of asthma; a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Registration

Publications

History of allergic rhinitis and risk of asthma; a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets