Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 155, No. 3, 2011
Issue release date: June 2011
Section title: Original Paper
Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2011;155:263–270
(DOI:10.1159/000320050)

Differences and Similarities between Allergic and Nonallergic Rhinitis in a Large Sample of Adult Patients with Rhinitis Symptoms

Di Lorenzo G.a · Pacor M.L.d · Amodio E.c · Leto-Barone M.S.a · La Piana S.b · D’Alcamo A.a · Ditta V.a, b · Martinelli N.d · Di Bona D.b
aDipartimento di Medicina Interna e Specialistica DIMIS, Università degli Studi di Palermo, bDipartimento di Biopatologia e Metodologie Biomediche, Università degli Studi di Palermo, cDipartimento di Scienze per la Promozione della Salute G. D’Alessandro, Sezione di Igiene, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Palermo, dDipartimento di Medicina Clinica e Sperimentale, Università degli Studi di Verona, Verona, Italia

Do you have an account?

Register and profit from personalized services (MyKarger) Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information









I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

Register and profit from personalized services (MyKarger) Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information









I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Buy

  • FullText & PDF
  • Unlimited re-access via MyKarger (new!)
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
  • Reduced rates with a PPV account
read more

Direct: USD 38.00
Account: USD 26.50

Select

Rent/Cloud

  • Rent for 48h to view
  • Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
  • Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
  • Printing and saving restrictions apply

Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00

Select

Subscribe

  • Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years
  • Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

Subcription rates


Select


Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Original Paper

Received: 5/31/2010
Accepted: 8/6/2010
Published online: 2/2/2011
Issue release date: June 2011

Number of Print Pages: 8
Number of Figures: 1
Number of Tables: 3

ISSN: 1018-2438 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0097 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/IAA

Abstract

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) may present with different clinical and laboratory characteristics. Methods: A total of 1,511 consecutive patients, aged 18–81 years, diagnosed with rhinitis, 56% females and 44% males, underwent complete allergic evaluation including skin prick test, blood eosinophil counts, nasal eosinophil counts, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) measurement and evaluation of nasal symptoms using a visual analog scale (VAS). Results: A total of 1,107 patients (73%)had AR, whereas 404 (27%) had NAR. Patients with NAR were older and predominantly female. A higher nasal eosinophils count was associated with AR and a lack of clinical response to antihistamines. AR patients had more sneezing and nasal pruritus, whereas NAR was characterized mainly by nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea. AR patients had more severe symptoms and recurrent conjunctivitis, whereas NAR patients had slightly more frequent episodes of recurring headaches as well as olfactory dysfunction. PNIF, blood eosinophil counts and VAS of nasal symptoms were higher in patients with AR. In a final logistic regression model, 10 variables were statistically different between AR and NAR: age [OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.96–0.98)], sneezing [OR 4.09 (95% CI 2.78–6.00)], nasal pruritus [OR 3.84 (95% CI 2.60–5.67)], mild symptoms [OR 0.21 (95% CI 0.09–0.49)], intermittent/severe nasal symptoms [OR 3.66 (95% CI 2.06–6.50)], VAS [OR 1.06 (95% CI 1.04–1.08)], clinical response to antihistamines [OR 22.59 (95% CI 13.79–37.00)], conjunctivitis [OR 4.49 (95% CI 2.86–7.05)], PNIF [OR 1.01 (95% CI 1.00–1.01)] and nasal eosinophil counts [OR 1.14 (95% CI 1.10–1.18)]. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed high predictive accuracy for a model including these variables independently of the diagnosis of AR/NAR (cutoff <0.74). Conclusions: We showed that the several clinical and laboratory parameters reported above may help to reinforce or exclude the diagnosis of AR obtained with skin prick test.


  

Author Contacts

Correspondence to: Prof. Gabriele Di Lorenzo
Dipartimento di Medicina Interna e Specialistica DIMIS
Università degli Studi di Palermo
Via del Vespro 141, IT–90127 Palermo (Italy)
Tel. +39 091 655 2987, Fax +39 091 655 2936, E-Mail dilo601@unipa.it

  

Article Information

Received: May 31, 2010
Accepted after revision: August 6, 2010
Published online: February 2, 2011
Number of Print Pages : 8
Number of Figures : 1, Number of Tables : 3, Number of References : 19

  

Publication Details

International Archives of Allergy and Immunology

Vol. 155, No. 3, Year 2011 (Cover Date: June 2011)

Journal Editor: Valenta R. (Vienna)
ISSN: 1018-2438 (Print), eISSN: 1423-0097 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/IAA


Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Original Paper

Received: 5/31/2010
Accepted: 8/6/2010
Published online: 2/2/2011
Issue release date: June 2011

Number of Print Pages: 8
Number of Figures: 1
Number of Tables: 3

ISSN: 1018-2438 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0097 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/IAA


Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.