Literature DB >> 24512461

Comparison of totally occlusive nasal pack, internal nasal splint, and transseptal suture technique after septoplasty in terms of immediate respiratory distress related to anesthesia and surgical complications.

Melih Cayonu1, Aydın Acar, Eyup Horasanlı, Aytug Altundag, Murat Salihoglu.   

Abstract

CONCLUSION: The patients who underwent septoplasty with bilateral totally occlusive nasal packing had an increased risk of experiencing respiratory distress (RD).
OBJECTIVE: To compare the immediate RD rates during recovery from anesthesia and surgical complications of totally occlusive nasal pack, internal nasal splint, and transseptal suture technique.
METHODS: A total of 150 patients were assigned to one of three groups according to the technique utilized following septoplasty: transseptal suturing, internal nasal splint, or Merocel (nasal dressing without airway). To determine RD related to anesthesia in the operating theatre, the criterion was defined as any unanticipated hypoxemia, hypoventilation or upper airway obstruction (stridor or laryngospasm) requiring an active and specific intervention. Postoperative hemorrhage, infection, synechia formation, and septal perforation were evaluated.
RESULTS: Patients in the Merocel group were 3.6 times more likely to have RD than patients in the transseptal suture and internal nasal splint groups. Also, patients who smoked had an increased risk of RD during the recovery phase of anesthesia after the septoplasty. In addition, all three techniques resulted in similar complication rates after septoplasty, with the exception of minor hemorrhage, which had a significantly higher rate in the transseptal suture group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24512461     DOI: 10.3109/00016489.2013.878476

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol        ISSN: 0001-6489            Impact factor:   1.494


  7 in total

1.  Nasal silicone splints and quilting sutures using a septum stitch device following septoplasty: a prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Akihito Kuboki; Shun Kikuchi; Daiya Asaka; Nobuto Onda; Tsuguhisa Nakayama; Hiromi Kojima; Nobuyoshi Otori
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-05-23       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 2.  Comparison on effectiveness of trans-septal suturing versus nasal packing after septoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Wei-Wei Wang; Bao-Cheng Dong
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  The comparison of the quality of life and intranasal edema between the patients with or without nasal packing after septoplasty.

Authors:  B Kayahan; S Ozer; A E Suslu; O Ogretmenoglu; M Onerci
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-11-24       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Optimal time for intranasal splint removal after septoplasty: a prospective clinical study.

Authors:  Fatih Ozdogan; Halil Erdem Ozel; Erkan Esen; Turgut Yuce; Saban Eyisarac; Selahattin Genc; Adin Selcuk
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-03-25       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Effects of polymer-based, silver nanoparticle-coated silicone splints on the nasal mucosa of rats.

Authors:  Sultan Şevik Eliçora; Duygu Erdem; Aykut Erdem Dinç; Özlem Altunordu Kalaycı; Baki Hazer; Gamze Yurdakan; Canan Külah
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  A new modification of Doyle splint (Hemi-split Doyle) in rhinoplasty with alar base reduction.

Authors:  İlker Koçak; E Şentürk
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 2.503

7.  Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy for an Intranasal Airway Device in Nasal Surgery.

Authors:  Prem B Tripathi; Pejman Majd; Tuan Ngo; Jefferey T Gu; Giriraj K Sharma; Christopher Badger; Naveen D Bhandarkar; Brian J F Wong
Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 4.611

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.