Search

We report the case of a 65-year-old male who presented with a 1-week history of right periorbital pain and progressive visual loss. He had a history of ulcerative colitis and was taking oral corticosteroids and mesalazine. Neurological and radiological examination demonstrated a rare case of invasive fungal rhinosinusitis that began with orbital apex syndrome. Initial endoscopic sinus surgery was performed and fungal culture identified Aspergillus fumigatus. Although antifungal treatment was started empirically before the operation, the patient had improved orbital pain but continued to have decreased right vision. Five months after the first surgical procedure, his condition deteriorated, including loss of consciousness, and a right temporal lobe abscess was found and surgically drained. Since then, the patient received antifungal treatment for 4 years without recurrence. Invasive fungal rhinosinusitis with orbital apex syndrome should be treated with long-term postoperative antifungal medication. It should be noted that even in immunosuppressive individuals such as ulcerative colitis, fungal rhinosinusitis with orbital apex syndrome may become severe.

Background A fexofenadine/pseudoephedrine combination tablet (F/P) is an optimal product for nasal obstruction. It contains fexofenadine hydrochloride, a histamine H1-receptor antagonist for sneezing and rhinorrhea and pseudoephedrine hydrochloride, an α-adrenergic agonist. The effect of an antihistamine-decongestant on nasal obstruction has been demonstrated in previous studies, but onset of action and efficacy data on nasal obstruction are limited. Objective We estimated the efficacy of F/P on nasal obstruction in patients with house dust mite-induced allergic rhinitis (AR) versus fexofenadine (F) using objective methods. Methods In this single-center, single-dose, prospective, randomized, parallel-group study, 24 adult patients with a history of at least 2 years of AR and nasal obstruction were randomized to receive F/P or F. The effect on nasal obstruction was evaluated using nasal airflow and visual analog scale (VAS) score measured at 30-minute intervals before and for 8 hours after dosing. The primary end point was onset of action, based on a comparison of absolute change from baseline in nasal airflow between F/P and F. The protocol was registered in a clinical trial registry as UMIN 000041845. Results The onset of action for F/P was 30 minutes based on nasal airflow and 60 minutes based on VAS. F/P maintained a significant beneficial effect after onset of effect, while F showed no significant change during the test period. Conclusions We found F/P had a clear effect on nasal obstruction associated with perennial AR when compared with F. There was a time lag in nasal airflow improvement and nasal obstruction relief.