Trials / Not Yet Recruiting
Not Yet RecruitingNCT07323888
Traditional vs. Posterior Nasal Radiofrequency Ablation for Chronic Rhinitis
Comparison of Traditional Radiofrequency Ablation of Inferior Turbinates With or Without Posterior Nasal Radiofrequency Ablation: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- Status
- Not Yet Recruiting
- Phase
- N/A
- Study type
- Interventional
- Enrollment
- 60 (estimated)
- Sponsor
- Chien Yu Huang · Academic / Other
- Sex
- All
- Age
- 18 Years – 65 Years
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
Summary
This study is a prospective, single-center, single-blinded randomized controlled trial designed to compare the clinical effectiveness of traditional radiofrequency ablation of the anterior inferior turbinate alone versus expanded radiofrequency ablation including the middle and posterior portions of the inferior turbinate (posterior nasal region). Patients with chronic rhinitis who remain symptomatic despite at least six months of medical therapy will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to undergo extended posterior nasal ablation versus traditional anterior treatment. Symptom improvement will be evaluated using rTNSS and other validated questionnaires.
Detailed description
Chronic rhinitis is a common condition characterized by persistent nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea, leading to significant impairment in quality of life. Radiofrequency ablation of the inferior turbinate is an established minimally invasive treatment for patients with symptoms refractory to medical therapy. However, symptom control may be suboptimal in some patients, particularly when posterior nasal neural components contribute to disease persistence. Posterior nasal radiofrequency ablation, which extends treatment to the middle and posterior portions of the inferior turbinate, has been proposed as an adjunctive technique to enhance symptom relief by targeting posterior nasal regions. Evidence comparing traditional anterior inferior turbinate radiofrequency ablation with expanded posterior nasal radiofrequency ablation remains limited. In this prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial, eligible patients with chronic rhinitis refractory to at least six months of medical therapy will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive either expanded radiofrequency ablation including the middle and posterior portions of the inferior turbinate or traditional anterior inferior turbinate radiofrequency ablation alone. The primary outcome is the response rate based on improvement in reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS), defined as a ≥30% reduction from baseline at 3 months after the procedure. Secondary outcomes include changes in validated symptom and quality-of-life questionnaires and the incidence of procedure-related complications.
Conditions
Interventions
| Type | Name | Description |
|---|---|---|
| PROCEDURE | Traditional Radiofrequency Ablation of Inferior Turbinates With Posterior Nasal Radiofrequency Ablation | Intervention: Radiofrequency Ablation (Olympus Celon Elite ESG-400) * Local anesthesia with 2% lidocaine * RF ablation at 15W * Multiple punctures along anterior, middle, and posterior inferior turbinate (15-20 per side) * Includes posterior nasal region (superior, medial, inferior aspects) * No nasal packing required Post-operative care (3 days): 1. Tranexamic acid 250mg 1cap BID x3 days 2. Amoxicillin 500mg 1 cap BID x3 days 3. Acetaminophen 500mg 1tab BID x3 days 4. Levocetirizine 5mg 1tab QD x3 days + PRN x4 days |
| PROCEDURE | Traditional Radiofrequency Ablation of Inferior Turbinates | Intervention: Radiofrequency Ablation (anterior inferior turbinate only) * Same anesthesia and device * RF applied only to anterior inferior turbinate (≈2 punctures per side) * No treatment to middle/posterior inferior turbinate Post-operative care: Same as experimental arm |
Timeline
- Start date
- 2026-01-01
- Primary completion
- 2026-12-01
- Completion
- 2027-12-01
- First posted
- 2026-01-07
- Last updated
- 2026-01-14
Locations
1 site across 1 country: Taiwan
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT07323888. Inclusion in this directory is not an endorsement.