TOPLINE:

Peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) measurement was a feasible, noninvasive method for assessing nasal airflow obstruction in children with cystic fibrosis and correlated significantly with nasal endoscopic findings and lung function.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers conducted a prospective cohort study enrolling 49 children with cystic fibrosis (mean age, 11.4 years; 53% women) to evaluate PNIF — a noninvasive measure of nasal airway obstruction — as a complementary tool for pulmonary assessment.
• Children underwent comprehensive testing, including nasal endoscopy, scored using the Lund-Kennedy score for chronic rhinosinusitis, spirometry to assess lung function, and PNIF measurement using a nasal inspiratory flow meter.
• Quality of life was assessed using the Sinus and Nasal Quality of Life Survey for children aged 12 years or younger; nasal obstruction-related quality of life was measured using the Visual Analog Scale, with higher scores indicating better quality of life.

TAKEAWAY:

• All participants had a total Lund-Kennedy score > 2, which confirmed the diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis; mean PNIF was 79.1 L/min and mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was 98.6% of predicted values.
• PNIF was significantly higher in boys than in girls (93.1 vs 67.2 L/min; P = .003).
• PNIF was negatively correlated with the Lund-Kennedy endoscopic score (correlation coefficient, -0.538; P < .001), indicating that reduced nasal airflow was associated with more severe endoscopic signs of obstruction.
• PNIF showed a significant positive correlation with predicted FEV1 (P = .001) indicating that nasal airflow may reflect broader lung function; however, neither PNIF nor the Lund-Kennedy score was significantly correlated with quality-of-life scores.

IN PRACTICE:

“PNIF emerges as a promising and pragmatic tool — particularly in children — thanks to its simplicity, noninvasiveness, and reproducibility. These features support its potential integration into broader clinical and research settings focused on sinonasal function and its interplay with pulmonary health in cystic fibrosis,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

This study was led by Paolo Pezzella, Reproductive Sciences and Dentistry — Department of Translational Medicine, Regional Centre of Cystic fibrosis — University of Naples “Federico II”, Naples, Italy. It was published online on October 28, 2025, in Journal of Cystic Fibrosis.

LIMITATIONS:

Because this study was cross-sectional, PNIF could not be assessed as a marker of disease progression or treatment response over time. Validation of PNIF against rhinomanometry, the gold standard technique, was not performed. Although significant associations were observed between PNIF, FEV₁, and age, the study design did not determine whether PNIF provides independent value in evaluating lower airway function.

DISCLOSURES:

No funding source was reported. One author disclosed receiving lecture fees and participating in expert board meetings for multiple pharmaceutical companies.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.