Explore the vast range of titles available.

The purpose of this study is to (1) to determine if treatment of underlying allergic rhinitis (AR) in children will affect epistaxis outcome, (2) to compare efficacy of three outpatient AR treatment regimens in epistaxis outcomes, and (3) to investigate potential factors in the pathogenesis of epistaxis with underlying AR. A single-blind randomized-controlled study was conducted in the Otolaryngology clinic in KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital. Sixty children aged below 18 years with underlying untreated AR, with first presentation of epistaxis, were randomized to three different AR treatments: treatment 1, antihistamine (20 patients); treatment 2, nasal steroid spray (20 patients); and treatment 3, both antihistamine and nasal steroid spray (20 patients). Epistaxis severity and frequency were assessed. Pre-treatment, 95% of patients within each of the three treatment groups described epistaxis symptoms. Post-treatment, there was improvement in epistaxis outcome (resolution of epistaxis) with 20% (4/20), 40% (8/20), and 60% (12/20) of patients in treatment groups 1 (antihistamine), 2 (nasal steroid spray), and 3 (combined therapy) respectively, who reported resolution of epistaxis. Treatment regimens containing nasal steroid spray resulted in greater improvement of epistaxis severity and frequency. Combined therapy (treatment 3) resulted in the best epistaxis outcome at 1-month follow-up. Majority (90%) reported nose-picking/rubbing behavior. Conclusions: Intranasal corticosteroids are superior to oral antihistamines in relieving itch or rhinorrhea in AR. Intranasal corticosteroids may be important in treating epistaxis with underlying AR, because digital trauma from itch/rhinorrhea-related nose-picking/rubbing frequently leads to epistaxis. Results from this study will be important to primary and emergency physicians, community pediatricians, and pediatric allergists and otolaryngologists. What is Known: •  Childhood epistaxis commonly co-exists with allergic rhinitis (AR), causing significant symptoms and distress to patients. •  There are currently no studies reporti ng on epistaxis outcome aft er treatment of underlying AR. What is New: • This is a single-blind randomized-controlled study of 60 children aged below 18 years with underlying untreated AR, with first presentation of epistaxis to a children’s hospital in Singapore Patients were randomized to three different regimens to treat AR: treatment 1, antihistamine; treatment 2, nasal steroid spray; and treatment 3, both antihistamine and nasal steroid spray. • Treatment regimens containing nasal steroid spray improved epistaxis outcomes, with combined therapy of antihistamine and nasal steroid spray resulting in the best outcome for resolution of epistaxis among the three treatment regimens.

Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is characterized by extensive telangiectasias and arteriovenous malformations. The primary clinical manifestation is epistaxis that results in iron-deficiency anemia and reduced health-related quality of life. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of pomalidomide for the treatment of HHT. We randomly assigned patients, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive pomalidomide at a dose of 4 mg daily or matching placebo for 24 weeks. The primary outcome was the change from baseline through week 24 in the Epistaxis Severity Score (a validated bleeding score in HHT; range, 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating worse bleeding). A reduction of 0.71 points or more is considered clinically significant. A key secondary outcome was the HHT-specific quality-of-life score (range, 0 to 16, with higher scores indicating more limitations). The trial was closed to enrollment in June 2023 after a planned interim analysis met a prespecified threshold for efficacy. A total of 144 patients underwent randomization; 95 patients were assigned to receive pomalidomide and 49 to receive placebo. The baseline mean (±SD) Epistaxis Severity Score was 5.0±1.5, a finding consistent with moderate-to-severe epistaxis. At 24 weeks, the mean difference between the pomalidomide group and the placebo group in the change from baseline in the Epistaxis Severity Score was -0.94 points (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.57 to -0.31; P = 0.004). The mean difference in the changes in the HHT-specific quality-of-life score between the groups was -1.4 points (95% CI, -2.6 to -0.3). Adverse events that were more common in the pomalidomide group than in the placebo group included neutropenia, constipation, and rash. Among patients with HHT, pomalidomide treatment resulted in a significant, clinically relevant reduction in epistaxis severity. No unexpected safety signals were identified. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; PATH-HHT Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT03910244).

Initial management of epistaxis involves digital compression of the lower third of the nose for 15 to 20 minutes. Anterior bleeding not controlled with compression can usually be controlled with topical vasoconstrictors, tranexamic acid, cautery, or anterior nasal packing. If epistaxis continues, posterior packing, arterial ligation, or embolization may be used.

Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is a rare angiogenic disorder causing chronic gastrointestinal bleeding, epistaxis, and severe anemia. Pazopanib is an oral multi-kinase angiogenesis inhibitor with promise to treat bleeding in HHT. We analyzed outcomes of HHT patients with the most severe bleeding causing RBC transfusion dependence treated on a predefined institutional pazopanib treatment pathway (with data collected retrospectively). The primary endpoint was achievement of transfusion independence. Secondary endpoints included hemoglobin, epistaxis severity score, RBC transfusion and iron infusion requirements, number of local hemostatic procedures, ferritin and transferrin saturation, compared using paired and repeated measures mean tests. Thirteen transfusion-dependent HHT patients received pazopanib [median (range) dose 150 (25–300) mg daily)] for a median of 22 months. All patients achieved transfusion independence. Compared with pretreatment, pazopanib increased mean hemoglobin by 4.8 (95% CI, 3.6–5.9) g/dL (7.8 vs. 12.7 g/dL, P < 0.0001) and decreased mean epistaxis severity score by 4.77 (3.11–6.44) points (7.20 vs. 2.43 points, P < 0.0001) after 12 months of treatment. Compared with 3 months of pretreatment, RBC transfusions decreased by 93% (median of 16.0 vs. 0.0 units, P < 0.0001) and elemental iron infusion decreased by 92% (median of 4500 vs. 0 mg, P = 0.005) during the first 3 months of treatment; improvements were maintained over time. Pazopanib was well-tolerated: hypertension, lymphocytopenia, and fatigue were the most common TEAEs. In conclusion, pazopanib was safe and effective to manage severe bleeding in HHT, liberating all patients from transfusion dependence and normalizing hematologic parameters at doses lower than used to treat malignancies. These findings require confirmation in a randomized trial.

Epistaxis is a worldwide problem with numerous proposed treatment algorithms, many of which end with nasal packing. Avoidance of packing, given its' known complications, is a reasonable goal.3,6 Therefore, we present several cases demonstrating the greater palatine foramen injection with epinephrine as an option for epistaxis management. The greater palatine foramen, located in the posterolateral hard palate intra-orally, gives rise to the greater palatine artery. This artery courses through the incisive foramen to the nasal septum and Kiesselbach's plexus. Anesthetizing it has been done for years to achieve dental anesthesia. Repurposing this procedure to control operative bleeding has been described in otolaryngology literature.5 Therefore, it is sensible to consider it for epistaxis management. Given the complications associated with nasal packing and patient discomfort with the procedure, it is reasonable to investigate additional treatment options for epistaxis; and; therefore, the greater palatine foramen injection may be appropriate for study in a prospective manner.

Purpose of ReviewTo analyze and compare the effects of epistaxis treatments for Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia (HHT) patients.Recent FindingsOf total of 21 randomized controlled trials (RCT), the data from 15 RCTs (697 patients, 7 treatments: timolol, propranolol, bevacizumab, doxycycline, tacrolimus, estriol/estradiol, and tranexamic acid) were pooled for the meta-analyses while the other 6 studies (treatments: electrosurgical plasma coagulation, KTP laser, postoperative packing, tamoxifen, sclerosing agent, and estriol) were reviewed qualitatively. When compared to placebo, propranolol offered the most improved epistaxis severity score, mean difference (MD), -1.68, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) [-2.80, -0.56] followed by timolol, MD -0.40, 95%CI [-0.79, -0.02]. Tranexamic acid significantly reduced the epistaxis frequency, MD -1.93, 95%CI [-3.58, -0.28]. Other treatments had indifferent effects to placebo. Qualitative analysis highlighted the benefits of tamoxifen and estriol. The adverse events of tranexamic acid, tacrolimus, propranolol, and estradiol were significantly reported.SummaryPropranolol, timolol, tranexamic acid, tamoxifen, and estriol were effective treatments which offered benefits to HHT patients in epistaxis management. Adverse events of tranexamic acid, tacrolimus, propranolol, and estradiol should be concerned.

Background Epistaxis is the most common emergent consultation to otolaryngology-head & neck surgery (OHNS) and with 60% of the population having experienced an episode and 1.6 in 10,000 requiring hospitalization in their lifetime. In preliminary studies Floseal® (Baxter, USA) Hemostatic Matrix has shown efficacy in up to 80% of persistent anterior epistaxis. We sought to evaluate the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of Floseal® (Baxter, USA) compared to traditional nasal packing for persistent epistaxis. Methods A prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted on all adult patients consulted to the OHNS service at the tertiary referral centers of the University of Alberta Hospital and Royal Alexandra Hospital for persistent epistaxis. Patients were randomized to the Floseal® (Baxter, USA) or traditional packing study arms. Our main clinical outcome measures were: 1) Hemostasis directly following treatment and at 48 h post-treatment, and 2) self-reported patient comfort at 48 h post-treatment. Further, trial data was used for a formal cost-effectiveness analysis to determine incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Univariate sensitivity analysis and uncertainty analysis were performed. Results There were no significant differences between groups for initial hemostasis (76.9% vs. 84.6%, p  = 1.000) or, hemostasis at 48 h (76.9% vs. 69.2%, p  = 1.000), requirement for admission (15.4% vs. 46.1%, p  = 0.2016) or 30-day re-presentation rates (15.4% vs. 46.1%, p  = 0.2016). Floseal® (Baxter, USA) was superior for decreased pain during placement (2.42 vs. 7.77, p  = 0.0022), treatment (0.50 vs. 4.46, p  = 0.0007) and removal (0 vs. 3.85, p  = 0.0021). Floseal® (Baxter, USA) provides an average $1567.61 per patient savings from the single-payer system point of view and has an ICER of - $11,891 per re-bleed prevented (95% CI: -$37,658 to +$473). Uncertainty analysis shows that Floseal® has >90% chance of not only being cost-effective, but the dominant (preferred) treatment. Conclusions Floseal® (Baxter, USA) was demonstrated to be an effective, comfortable and cost-effective alternative treatment of persistent epistaxis when compared to traditional packing methods for patients referred to OHNS with a normal coagulation profile. Trial registration Trial registration number: NCT02488135 . Date registered: June 26, 2015.

[...]patients satisfaction from the treatment was measured via Likert scale (strongly satisfied, satisfied, no idea, dissatisfied, strongly dissatisfied). [...]30 patients in group A (nose clip) and 31 patients in group B (manual compression) were treated and analyzed (Fig. 1). Table 1 Baseline characteristics of enrolled patients Variables Nose clip Manual Patients N 30 31 Age mean (range) 41 (19-77) 44 (17-68) Male:Female 14:16 16:15 Epistaxis severity before intervention N (%) Spotting 7 (23) 6 (19) Oozing 8 (26) 9 (29) Stream 15 (50) 16 (51) 1 L. Melia, G.W. McGarry, Epistaxis: update on management, Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, Vol. 19, 2011, 30-35 2 S.J. Kilty, Prospective clinical trial of gelatin-thrombin matrix as first line treatment of posterior epistaxis, Laryngoscope, Vol. 124, Iss. 1, 2014, 38-42 3 A. Tomkinson, D.G. Roblin, P. Flanagan, Patterns of hospital attendance with epistaxis, Rhinology, Vol. 35, Iss. 3, 1997, 129-131 4 T.L. Viehweg, J.B. Roberson, J.W. Hudson, Epistaxis: diagnosis and treatment, J Oral Maxillofac Surg, Vol. 64, Iss. 3, 2006, 511-518 5 R. Douglas, P.J. Wormald, Update on epistaxis, Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, Vol. 15, Iss. 3, 2007, 180-183 6 K. Fukutsuji, Superselective angiographic embolization for intractable epistaxis, Acta Otolaryngol, Vol. 128, Iss. 5, 2008, 556-560 7 T.L. Viehweg, J.B. Roberson, J.W. Hudson, Epistaxis: diagnosis and treatment, J Oral Maxillofac Surg, Vol. 64, Iss. 3, 2006, 511-518 8 R. Zahed, P. Moharamzadeh, S. AlizadehArasi, A. Ghasemi, M. Saeedi, A new and rapid method for epistaxis treatment using injectable form of tranexamic acid topically: a randomized controlled trial, Am J Emerg Med, Vol. 31, Iss. 9, 2013 Sep 30, 1389-1392 9 B. Bertrand, P. Eloy, P. Rombaux, C. Lamarque, J.B. Watelet, S. Collet, Guidelines to the managment of epistaxis, B-ENT, Vol. 1, 2005 Jan, 27

Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia is a rare vascular genetic disease. Epistaxis is the most frequent and disabling manifestation, and timolol appears to be a new therapeutic option as non-selective beta-blockers have in vitro and in vivo anti-angiogenic properties. Our main objective was to evaluate the efficacy of TIMOLOL nasal spray as a treatment for epistaxis in hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia. This study is a single-center, randomized, phase 2, double-blind placebo-controlled study with an allocation ratio of 1:1. It was proposed to patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia monitored at the French Reference Center, and we included patients aged over 18 years, diagnosed with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia and epistaxis. The treatment was self-administered by the patient with a posology of one spray (50 microL) of timolol 0.5% or placebo in each nostril twice a day for 28 consecutive days. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean monthly epistaxis duration, assessed by monitoring epistaxis grids. A total of 58 patients were randomized and treated. The baseline characteristics were similar in the 2 groups. Mean monthly epistaxis duration measured at 3 months was not significantly different in the 26 patients receiving the drug in comparison with the placebo group (p = 0.54). Toxicity was low and no severe adverse events were reported. One limitation is that we included all HHT patients with nosebleeds and did not take into account history of nasal surgery or nasal crusts. Timolol, administered by nasal spray at a dose of 0.25 mg in each nostril twice a day for 28 consecutive days, did not improve epistaxis in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia at 4 months after the beginning of the treatment.

To present a multiyear clinical experience with intravenous bevacizumab for the management of severe gastrointestinal bleeding and/or epistaxis in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT). All patients treated with intravenous bevacizumab for severe hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia–related bleeding from June 1, 2013, through January 31, 2017, were included in this report. Severity of epistaxis (determined using the Epistaxis Severity Score questionnaire); hemoglobin, iron, and ferritin levels; and quality of life data were collected serially in all patients. Intravenous bevacizumab was administered to 34 patients using a standardized treatment protocol. Anemia was primarily related to severe epistaxis (n=15, 44%), severe gastrointestinal bleeding (n=4, 12%), or both (n=15, 44%), with a median baseline hemoglobin level of 9.1 g/dL (range, 8.3-10.5 gm/dL; to convert to mmol/L, multiply by 0.62). Red blood cell (RBC) transfusions had been administered to 28 patients (82%). Of these, 16 patients (47%) were RBC transfusion dependent and had received a median of 75 RBC transfusions (range, 4->500 RBC units) before bevacizumab initiation. The median length of follow-up was 17.6 months from the beginning of bevacizumab treatment (range, 3-42.5 months). There was a significant reduction in epistaxis severity scores (P<.001) and RBC transfusion requirements (P=.007) after completion of the initial bevacizumab treatment cycle. New-onset or worsened hypertension was noted in 4 patients, with 1 patient experiencing hypertensive urgency with a temporary decline in renal function. Intravenous bevacizumab is an effective treatment option for patients with severe anemia related to epistaxis and/or gastrointestinal bleeding. Further studies are needed to establish a dose-response relationship as well as clinical, genetic, and biomarker predictors of response.