European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

, Volume 272, Issue 6, pp 1429–1435 | Cite as

The effect of thyme honey nasal spray on chronic rhinosinusitis: a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial

  • Farnaz Hashemian
  • Neda Baghbanian
  • Zahra Majd
  • Mohammad-Reza Rouini
  • Javaneh Jahanshahi
  • Farshad HashemianEmail author


Chronic rhinosinusitis is a common disease which causes persisting inflammatory conditions of one or more sinuses. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of thyme honey nasal spray as an adjunctive medication on chronic rhinosinusitis after functional endoscopic sinus surgery. This was a randomized, placebo controlled, double-blind clinical study. 64 patients with chronic rhinosinusitis undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized and blinded to receive either placebo or thyme honey nasal spray in addition to the standard regimen postoperatively. Patients were visited on postoperative days 7, 30 and 60. The sino-nasal outcome test, endoscopic grading system and sinus CT-scan were scored before operation and on the day 60 after surgery. 54 patients completed the study. Significant improvement was observed in both treatment groups. There were no significant changes in SNOT-22, endoscopy and CT-scan scores between the two study groups. However, a greater reduction in endoscopic scores was shown in thyme honey group. The incidence of adverse effects was not significantly different between the groups, but synechiae formation and epistaxis were lower in treatment group. Thyme honey nasal spray seems to be a low-priced potential adjuvant remedy with excellent safety profile, to reduce inflammation and polyp formation and also fostering mucosal healing for patients suffering from chronic rhinosinusitis. However, further studies are recommended.


FESS Chronic rhinosinusitis Thyme honey Polyposis Samter’s 



We would like to thank Dr. Mohammad Seifrabiei (statistical analyst), Mrs. Ghodsieh Saki (microbiologist) and Mrs. Faranak Noorbakhsh (radiology technician) for their kind cooperation in this study. This study is funded by an academic research grant provided by Hamadan University of Medical Sciences.

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest in this study.


  1. 1.
    Pant H, Schembri MA, Wormald PJ et al (2009) IgE-mediated fungal allergy in allergic fungal sinusitis. Laryngoscope 119:1046–1052. doi: 10.1002/lary.20170 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lusby PE, Coombes AL, Wilkinson JM (2005) Bactericidal activity of different honeys against pathogenic bacteria. Arch Med Res 36:464–467CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thamboo A, Thamboo A, Philpott C, Javer A, Clark A (2011) Single-blind study of manuka honey in allergic fungal rhinosinusitis. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 40(3):238–243PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hotta M, Nakata R, Katsukawa M, Hori K, Takahashi S, Inoue H (2010) Carvacrol, a component of thyme oil, activates PPAR α and γ and suppresses COX-2 expression. J Lipid Res 51:132–139. doi: 10.1194/jlr.M900255-JLR200 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vinas P, Soler-Romera MJ, Hernandez-Cordoba M (2006) Liquid chromatographic determination of phenol, thymol and carvacrol in honey using fluorimetric detection. Talanta 15(69):1063–1067. doi: 10.1016/j.talanta.2005.12.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Manisha DM, Shyamapada M (2011) Honey: its medicinal property and antibacterial activity. Asian Pac J Trop Biomed 1:154–160. doi: 10.1016/S2221-1691(11)60016-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tan HT, Abdul Rahman R, Gan SH et al (2009) The antibacterial properties of Malaysian tualang honey against wound and enteric microorganisms in comparison to manuka honey. BMC Complement Altern Med 9:34. doi: 10.1186/1472-6882-9-34 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kilty SJ, Mutari D, Melanie Duval M, Groleau MA, Nanassy J, Gomes MM (2010) Manuka honey: histological effect on respiratory mucosa. Am J Rhinol Allergy 24:63–66. doi: 10.2500/ajra.2010.24.3453 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lusby PE, Coombes A, Wilkinson JM (2002) Honey: a potent agent for wound healing? J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 29:295–300PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Haniyeh K, Seyyed MS, Hussein M (2010) Preliminary study on the antibacterial activity of some medicinal plants of Khuzestan (Iran). Asian Pac J Trop Med 3(3):180–184. doi: 10.1016/S1995-7645(10)60004-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alendejani T, Marsan JG, Ferris W, Slinger R, Chan F (2008) Effectiveness of honey on S.aureus and P.aeruginosa biofilms. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 139:107–111. doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2009.01.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Allen KL, Hutchinson G, Molan PC (2000) The potential for using honey to treat wounds infected with MRSA and VRE. First World Healing Congress, Melbourne, pp 10–13Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kingsley A (2001) The use of honey in the treatment of infected wound: case studies. Br J Nurs 10:13–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Visavadia BG, Honeysett J, Danford MH (2008) Manuka honey dressing: an effective treatment for chronic wound infections. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 46(1):55–56CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zekovic ZP, Lepojevic ZD, Markov SL, Milosevic SG (2002) Tablets with thyme (Thymus vulgaris L.) extracts. APTEFF 33:159–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tohidpour A, Sattari M, Omidbaigi R, Yadegar A, Nazemi J (2010) Antibacterial effect of essential oils from two medicinal plants against Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Phytomedicine 17:142–145. doi: 10.1016/j.phymed.2009.05.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tsigouri A, Passaloglou-Katrali M, Sabatakou O (2008) Determination of eucalyptol camphor menthol and thymol in Greek thyme honey by GC-FID. Acta Alimentaria 37(2):181–189. doi: 10.1556/AAlim.2007.0032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chang EH, Alandejani T, Akbari E, Ostry A, Javer A (2011) Double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial of medicated versus non-medicated merocel sponges for functional endoscopic sinus surgery. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 40:S14–S19PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Falcone P, Speranza B, Del Nobile MA, Corbo MR, Sinigaglia M (2005) A study on the antimicrobial activity of thymol intended as a natural preservative. J Food Prot 68(8):1664–1670PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nostro A, Roccaro AS, Bisignano G et al (2007) Effects of oregano, carvacrol and thymol on Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilms. J Med Microbiol 56:519–523. doi: 10.1099/jmm.0.46804-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gavliakova S, Biringerova Z, Buday T et al (2013) Antitussive effects of nasal thymol challenges in healthy volunteers. Respir Physiol Neurobiol 187(1):104–107. doi: 10.1016/j.resp.2013.02.011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Meltzer Eli O, Hamilos Daniel L (2011) Rhinosinusitis diagnosis and management for the clinician: a synopsis of recent consensus guidelines. Mayo Clin Proc 86(5):427–443. doi: 10.4065/mcp.2010.0392 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Farnaz Hashemian
    • 1
  • Neda Baghbanian
    • 1
  • Zahra Majd
    • 2
  • Mohammad-Reza Rouini
    • 3
  • Javaneh Jahanshahi
    • 1
  • Farshad Hashemian
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of OtolaryngologyHamadan University of Medical SciencesHamadanIran
  2. 2.Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of PharmacyTehran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  3. 3.Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of PharmacyTehran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  4. 4.Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Sciences BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations