{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.061490683229813665, 'fraction_numerical': 0.034782608695652174, 'mean_word_length': 5.033707865168539, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 6, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A randomized controlled trial comparing a xyloglucan-based nasal spray with saline in adults with symptoms of rhinosinusitis

Abstract Background: This study assessed the efficacy, safety and tolerability of a xyloglucan-based nasal spray in the treatment of symptoms of rhinosinusitis. Methodology: In this randomized, double-blind study, 40 patients with itching, nasal congestion or continuous sneezing and a Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) of ≥8 were randomized to 2 weeks’ treatment with a xyloglucan-based nasal spray (“xyloglucan”) or a physiological saline nasal spray (“saline”). Assessments included the TNSS, rhinosinusitis severity index, nocturnal awakenings, use of rescue medication, safety and tolerability. Results: Baseline symptom scores were similar between groups. At treatment end, improvements from baseline were observed in both groups for TNSS (xyloglucan 58%; saline 35%, both p < .05) and number of nocturnal awakenings (p < .05). A significant improvement in the rhinosinusitis severity index was observed only with xyloglucan (p < .05). At treatment end, mean [SD] scores were significantly lower in the xyloglucan group versus the saline group for TNSS (3.60 [2.16] vs. 5.40 [2.64], p < .05), rhinosinusitis severity index (7.55 [1.19] vs. 6.45 [1.40], p < .05), and rhinorrhea and itching (both p < .05). No rescue medication was used. Both treatments were well tolerated. Conclusions: A xyloglucan-based nasal spray provided greater relief of rhinosinusitis symptoms than a physiological saline spray and was well tolerated. Trial registration number (EUDRACT): 2014-000143-32.