Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Comparative efficacy of oral fexofenadine hydrochloride and intranasal fluticasone furoate in patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis: A prospective randomized comparative study.
View through CrossRef
Background
Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent chronic condition with a significant impact on quality of life. Pharmacotherapy with non-sedating antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids remains the mainstay, though comparative evidence in Indian settings is limited. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of oral fexofenadine hydrochloride and intranasal fluticasone furoate in patients with moderate to severe AR.
Methods
A prospective comparative study was conducted on 100 patients aged 16–55 years presenting with moderate to severe AR at a tertiary care centre. Participants were randomized into two equal groups: oral fexofenadine 120 mg once daily (Group OF) and intranasal fluticasone furoate spray, one puff daily (Group NF). Baseline demographic characteristics, symptom scores, and visual analogue scale (VAS) ratings were recorded. Patients were followed up weekly for four weeks.
Results
Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between groups (Table 1). Both groups demonstrated significant reduction in total symptom scores after 4 weeks (p < 0.001), with mean post-treatment scores of 1.16 ± 3.36 in Group OF and 1.90 ± 3.85 in Group NF (Table 2). Severity distribution showed that most patients shifted from severe to moderate categories without intergroup difference (Table 3). However, fluticasone produced greater improvement in nasal obstruction, sneezing, and nasal discharge compared with fexofenadine (Table 4). VAS scores confirmed the superior efficacy of intranasal fluticasone in reducing overall symptom burden (Table 5).
Conclusion
Both oral fexofenadine and intranasal fluticasone furoate are effective in alleviating symptoms of moderate to severe AR. Fluticasone demonstrated superior improvement in nasal symptoms and VAS reduction, suggesting it may be preferred as first-line therapy.
Recommendations
For patients with prominent nasal obstruction or persistent AR, intranasal corticosteroids should be prioritized. Antihistamines may be considered when systemic symptoms or patient preference for oral therapy exist.
SJC Publisher Company Limited
Title: Comparative efficacy of oral fexofenadine hydrochloride and intranasal fluticasone furoate in patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis: A prospective randomized comparative study.
Description:
Background
Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent chronic condition with a significant impact on quality of life.
Pharmacotherapy with non-sedating antihistamines and intranasal corticosteroids remains the mainstay, though comparative evidence in Indian settings is limited.
This study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of oral fexofenadine hydrochloride and intranasal fluticasone furoate in patients with moderate to severe AR.
Methods
A prospective comparative study was conducted on 100 patients aged 16–55 years presenting with moderate to severe AR at a tertiary care centre.
Participants were randomized into two equal groups: oral fexofenadine 120 mg once daily (Group OF) and intranasal fluticasone furoate spray, one puff daily (Group NF).
Baseline demographic characteristics, symptom scores, and visual analogue scale (VAS) ratings were recorded.
Patients were followed up weekly for four weeks.
Results
Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between groups (Table 1).
Both groups demonstrated significant reduction in total symptom scores after 4 weeks (p < 0.
001), with mean post-treatment scores of 1.
16 ± 3.
36 in Group OF and 1.
90 ± 3.
85 in Group NF (Table 2).
Severity distribution showed that most patients shifted from severe to moderate categories without intergroup difference (Table 3).
However, fluticasone produced greater improvement in nasal obstruction, sneezing, and nasal discharge compared with fexofenadine (Table 4).
VAS scores confirmed the superior efficacy of intranasal fluticasone in reducing overall symptom burden (Table 5).
Conclusion
Both oral fexofenadine and intranasal fluticasone furoate are effective in alleviating symptoms of moderate to severe AR.
Fluticasone demonstrated superior improvement in nasal symptoms and VAS reduction, suggesting it may be preferred as first-line therapy.
Recommendations
For patients with prominent nasal obstruction or persistent AR, intranasal corticosteroids should be prioritized.
Antihistamines may be considered when systemic symptoms or patient preference for oral therapy exist.
Related Results
Effects of a Thermosensitive In Situ Gel Containing Mometasone Furoate on a Rat Allergic Rhinitis Model
Effects of a Thermosensitive In Situ Gel Containing Mometasone Furoate on a Rat Allergic Rhinitis Model
Background
Mometasone furoate, one of the second generation intranasal corticosteroids, is currently used in suspension form due to its poor solubility. However...
Efficacy of Loratadine Versus Fexofenadine in Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis
Efficacy of Loratadine Versus Fexofenadine in Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis
Background: Allergic rhinitis is the disease mediated by immunoglobulin E. Anti-histamines are the main therapeutic option.Fexofenadine is the selective histamine H1-receptor antag...
Rhinitis-Respect your nose
Rhinitis-Respect your nose
We all know the functions of nose i.e. breathing and smell. The outcome of breathing is to ventilate the lungs and we also know that there is lung compliance which reflects its eff...
Persistent rhinitis – allergic or nonallergic?
Persistent rhinitis – allergic or nonallergic?
SummaryAlthough rhinitis has been classified as being either allergic, noninfectious, or ‘‘other forms’’ (nonallergic noninfectious), these categories lack strict classification cr...
Allergic Rhinitis: A Critical Modern Review
Allergic Rhinitis: A Critical Modern Review
Allergic rhinitis addresses a hyperactivity of the resistant framework in any case harmless particles making a fiery reaction where none is required. Allergic Rhinitis is clinicall...
Allergic rhinitis and asthma comorbidity: ARIA classification of rhinitis does not correlate with the prevalence of asthma
Allergic rhinitis and asthma comorbidity: ARIA classification of rhinitis does not correlate with the prevalence of asthma
SummaryBackground
Allergic rhinitis and asthma comorbidity is supported by both the similar underlying pathogenesis and immunologic mechanisms. The aim of this study was to v...
Co-inhalation of roflumilast, rather than formoterol, with fluticasone more effectively improves asthma in asthmatic mice
Co-inhalation of roflumilast, rather than formoterol, with fluticasone more effectively improves asthma in asthmatic mice
Roflumilast is approved as an add-on therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The inflammation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is mainly neutrophilic, while in a...
Effect of acute exercises, chronic exercise training and vitamin C supplementation on physiological change and symptoms in allegic rhinitis patients
Effect of acute exercises, chronic exercise training and vitamin C supplementation on physiological change and symptoms in allegic rhinitis patients
The aim of this present study was to investigate an effect of acute exhaustive and moderate intensities exercises, exercise training and vitamin C supplementation on physiological ...

