- Email: [email protected]
Localization of muscarinic m3 receptor mRNA in human nasal mucosa
Abstracts
DAVID E. EIBLING,
MD, EDITOR
Frontal Sinus Osteoma: Complete Removal Via Endoscopic Sinus Surgery and Frontal Sinus Trephination. RF Bush. Am J Rhino1 6:139143,1992 Endoscopic approaches to the frontal sinus have recently been introduced for the management of chronic and acute frontal sinusitis. The authors present a combined external and endoscopic approach for removal of frontal sinus osteomas in order to avoid the more commonly performed osteoplastic flap procedure for this disease. Briefly, their technique involves an endoscopic ethmoidectomy followed by frontal sinus trephination with removal of the osteoma with a drill. The key to this technique is endoscopic monitoring of the procedure by means of an endoscope passed through the trephine. Following removal of the osteoma, the nasofrontal duct is identified and stented with a catheter passed from the sinus into the nose. The stent is left in place for 6 to 8 weeks, and routine postoperative endoscopic sinus irrigations and cleaning are used. This article presents several interesting concepts. The use of an endoscope passed through a trephine to examine and monitor the removal of the osteoma seems to be an effective use of this instrumentation. Avoidance of the osteoplastic flap would, theoretically, significantly decrease the morbidity of the procedure. Finally, identification of the nasofrontal duct by passing a catheter from the sinus into the nose could be very helpful for the endoscopic sinus surgeon approaching the frontal sinus for a variety of diseases. One wonders if stenting of the nasofrontal duct is necessary, particularly if the mucosa in the region of the nasofrontal duct was not disturbed. Nevertheless, although the author reports only two cases that this procedure was used, the techniques used would seem to be of value in a variety of frontal sinus surgical procedures.
Localization of Muscarinic m3 Receptor mRNA in Human Nasal Mucosa. RF Baraniuk, MA Kaliner, PJ Barnes. Am J Rhino1 6:145-148,1992 Nasal reflexes are influenced by the autonomic nervous system. Parasympathetic response results in increased mucous production and vasodilatation. These effects have been demonstrated to be muscarinic by the blockage caused by muscarinic antagonizers such as atropine. There exist at least five American
muscarinic receptors, of which three have been identified in nasal mucosa. This study used in situ hybridization to identify the presence of mRNA for the m3 receptor in nasal mucosa. Dense staining of epithelial cells, mucous and serous glands, and vascular endothelium was noted. Staining was blocked by the addition of RNAase, confirming that the probe was specific for the mRNA. The findings of this study suggest that the muscarinic m3 receptor may play an important role in the pathogenesis of vasomotor rhinitis. The authors suggest that the development of specific m3 receptor antagonists may provide an additional therapeutic strategy for the treatment of vasomotorinduced rhinitis.
Lymphocyte Subsets in Nasal Mucosa and Peripheral Blood During Experimental Rhinovirus Infection. B Winther, DJ Innes, J Bratsch, FG Hayden. Am J Rhino1 6:149-156,
1992
It has been suggested that the local inflammatory response of the nasal mucosa following experimental rhinovirus infection is secondary to infiltration of the mucosa with inflammatory cells. This study used volunteers who were treated with experimental rhinovirus, and biopsies of their nasal mucosa were taken at 3 days, 5 days, and 14 days and compared with historical controls. Only one biopsy was taken from each nostril to avoid sequential abnormality secondary to the initial biopsy. Seventeen of the 20 volunteers had evidence of infection in that they developed positive viral cultures following inoculation. Only one patient had marked lymphocytic infiltration, most had mild infiltration. There was no statistical difference in infiltration between the patients studied and historical controls. Moreover, there was no significant change noted between days 3, 5, and 14. Preinoculation biopsies were not performed in the study due to the desire to avoid producing artifact. There was no appreciable difference in either the T helper, T suppressor, or B cell numbers either at days 3, 5, and 14 or when compared with healthy controls. Peripheral blood subsets were also not altered. This is an important article in that it demonstrates the lack of histologically evident inflammatory response following experimental rhinovirus inoculation. The authors speculate that inflammatory response may be localized to another site, such as the nasopharynx. There may be significant therapeutic implications in further investigation into experimental rhinovirus infections.
Journal of Otolaryngology, Vol 14, No 1 (January-February),
1993: pp 67-68
67
DAVID E. EIBLING,
MD, EDITOR
Frontal Sinus Osteoma: Complete Removal Via Endoscopic Sinus Surgery and Frontal Sinus Trephination. RF Bush. Am J Rhino1 6:139143,1992 Endoscopic approaches to the frontal sinus have recently been introduced for the management of chronic and acute frontal sinusitis. The authors present a combined external and endoscopic approach for removal of frontal sinus osteomas in order to avoid the more commonly performed osteoplastic flap procedure for this disease. Briefly, their technique involves an endoscopic ethmoidectomy followed by frontal sinus trephination with removal of the osteoma with a drill. The key to this technique is endoscopic monitoring of the procedure by means of an endoscope passed through the trephine. Following removal of the osteoma, the nasofrontal duct is identified and stented with a catheter passed from the sinus into the nose. The stent is left in place for 6 to 8 weeks, and routine postoperative endoscopic sinus irrigations and cleaning are used. This article presents several interesting concepts. The use of an endoscope passed through a trephine to examine and monitor the removal of the osteoma seems to be an effective use of this instrumentation. Avoidance of the osteoplastic flap would, theoretically, significantly decrease the morbidity of the procedure. Finally, identification of the nasofrontal duct by passing a catheter from the sinus into the nose could be very helpful for the endoscopic sinus surgeon approaching the frontal sinus for a variety of diseases. One wonders if stenting of the nasofrontal duct is necessary, particularly if the mucosa in the region of the nasofrontal duct was not disturbed. Nevertheless, although the author reports only two cases that this procedure was used, the techniques used would seem to be of value in a variety of frontal sinus surgical procedures.
Localization of Muscarinic m3 Receptor mRNA in Human Nasal Mucosa. RF Baraniuk, MA Kaliner, PJ Barnes. Am J Rhino1 6:145-148,1992 Nasal reflexes are influenced by the autonomic nervous system. Parasympathetic response results in increased mucous production and vasodilatation. These effects have been demonstrated to be muscarinic by the blockage caused by muscarinic antagonizers such as atropine. There exist at least five American
muscarinic receptors, of which three have been identified in nasal mucosa. This study used in situ hybridization to identify the presence of mRNA for the m3 receptor in nasal mucosa. Dense staining of epithelial cells, mucous and serous glands, and vascular endothelium was noted. Staining was blocked by the addition of RNAase, confirming that the probe was specific for the mRNA. The findings of this study suggest that the muscarinic m3 receptor may play an important role in the pathogenesis of vasomotor rhinitis. The authors suggest that the development of specific m3 receptor antagonists may provide an additional therapeutic strategy for the treatment of vasomotorinduced rhinitis.
Lymphocyte Subsets in Nasal Mucosa and Peripheral Blood During Experimental Rhinovirus Infection. B Winther, DJ Innes, J Bratsch, FG Hayden. Am J Rhino1 6:149-156,
1992
It has been suggested that the local inflammatory response of the nasal mucosa following experimental rhinovirus infection is secondary to infiltration of the mucosa with inflammatory cells. This study used volunteers who were treated with experimental rhinovirus, and biopsies of their nasal mucosa were taken at 3 days, 5 days, and 14 days and compared with historical controls. Only one biopsy was taken from each nostril to avoid sequential abnormality secondary to the initial biopsy. Seventeen of the 20 volunteers had evidence of infection in that they developed positive viral cultures following inoculation. Only one patient had marked lymphocytic infiltration, most had mild infiltration. There was no statistical difference in infiltration between the patients studied and historical controls. Moreover, there was no significant change noted between days 3, 5, and 14. Preinoculation biopsies were not performed in the study due to the desire to avoid producing artifact. There was no appreciable difference in either the T helper, T suppressor, or B cell numbers either at days 3, 5, and 14 or when compared with healthy controls. Peripheral blood subsets were also not altered. This is an important article in that it demonstrates the lack of histologically evident inflammatory response following experimental rhinovirus inoculation. The authors speculate that inflammatory response may be localized to another site, such as the nasopharynx. There may be significant therapeutic implications in further investigation into experimental rhinovirus infections.
Journal of Otolaryngology, Vol 14, No 1 (January-February),
1993: pp 67-68
67