Literature DB >> 26708011

How effective is postoperative packing in FESS patients? A critical analysis of published interventional studies.

Petros V Vlastarakos1,2, Emily Iacovou3, Melina Fetta4, Marios Tapis3, Thomas P Nikolopoulos5.   

Abstract

The present study aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness of absorbable packing alone, non-absorbable packing alone, and absorbable versus non-absorbable packing in the postoperative care of FESS patients, regarding bleeding control, adhesion formation, wound healing, and overall patient comfort. Systematic literature review in Medline and other database sources until July 2013, and critical analysis of pooled data were conducted. Blinded prospective randomized control trials, prospective, and retrospective comparative studies were included in study selection. The total number of analyzed studies was 19. Placing packs in the middle meatus after endoscopic procedures does not seem to be harmful for postoperative patient care. Regarding the postoperative bleeding rate, absorbable packing is not superior to no postoperative packing (strength of recommendation A). Comparing absorbable to non-absorbable packing, the former one seems slightly more effective than the latter in the aforementioned domain (strength of recommendation C). Absorbable packing was also found more effective than non-absorbable packing as a means of reducing the postoperative adhesion rate (strength of recommendation B), and more effective in comparison with not placing any packing material at all (strength of recommendation C). Non-absorbable packing also proves more effective than no postoperative packing in preventing the appearance of such adhesions (strength of recommendation A). Absorbable packing is also more comfortable compared to non-absorbable materials (strength of recommendation A), or no postoperative packing in FESS patients (strength of recommendation B). The comparative analysis between the different packing modalities performed in the present study may help surgeons design a more individualized postoperative patient care.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Absorbable; Adhesions; Bleeding; FESS; Packing; Pain; Quality-of-life

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26708011     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-015-3863-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  35 in total

1.  Comparison between Gelfoam packing and no packing after endoscopic sinus surgery in the same patients.

Authors:  Jee Hye Wee; Chul Hee Lee; Chae Seo Rhee; Jeong-Whun Kim
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2011-09-28       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  The effect of an expandable polyvinyl acetate (Merocel) pack on the healing of the nasal mucosa of sheep.

Authors:  David McIntosh; Allison Cowin; Damian Adams; Peter-John Wormald
Journal:  Am J Rhinol       Date:  2005 Nov-Dec

3.  Sepragel sinus (hylan B) as a postsurgical dressing for endoscopic sinus surgery.

Authors:  C P Kimmelman; D R Edelstein; H J Cheng
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.497

4.  EPOS 2012: European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2012. A summary for otorhinolaryngologists.

Authors:  Wytske J Fokkens; Valerie J Lund; Joachim Mullol; Claus Bachert; Isam Alobid; Fuad Baroody; Noam Cohen; Anders Cervin; Richard Douglas; Philippe Gevaert; Christos Georgalas; Herman Goossens; Richard Harvey; Peter Hellings; Claire Hopkins; Nick Jones; Guy Joos; Livije Kalogjera; Bob Kern; Marek Kowalski; David Price; Herbert Riechelmann; Rodney Schlosser; Brent Senior; Mike Thomas; Elina Toskala; Richard Voegels; De Yun Wang; Peter John Wormald
Journal:  Rhinology       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 3.681

5.  The effects of Vaseline gauze strip, Merocel, and Nasopore on the formation of synechiae and excessive granulation tissue in the middle meatus and the incidence of major postoperative bleeding after endoscopic sinus surgery.

Authors:  Ying-Piao Wang; Mao-Che Wang; Yu-Chun Chen; Yi-Shing Leu; Hung-Ching Lin; Kuo-Sheng Lee
Journal:  J Chin Med Assoc       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.743

6.  [Is packing of the nose up-to-date ?].

Authors:  R K Weber; U Hay
Journal:  Laryngorhinootologie       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 1.057

Review 7.  A scientific review of middle meatal packing/stents.

Authors:  Erik Kent Weitzel; Peter-John Wormald
Journal:  Am J Rhinol       Date:  2008 May-Jun

8.  CMC packing in functional endoscopic sinus surgery: does it affect patient comfort?

Authors:  Andreas Leunig; Christian S Betz; Vanessa Siedek; Konrad G Kastl
Journal:  Rhinology       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.681

9.  Effects of nonabsorbable packing in middle meatus after sinus surgery.

Authors:  Vegard Bugten; Ståle Nordgård; Eirik Skogvoll; Sverre Steinsvåg
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  Effect of carboxymethylcellulose nasal packing on wound healing after functional endoscopic sinus surgery.

Authors:  Konrad G Kastl; Christian S Betz; Vanessa Siedek; Andreas Leunig
Journal:  Am J Rhinol Allergy       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.467

View more
  2 in total

1.  Hot saline irrigation in comparison to nasal packing after sinus surgery.

Authors:  Axel Nordström; Mattias Jangard; Marie Svedberg; Helena Kullenberg; Michael Ryott; Maria Kumlin
Journal:  Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol       Date:  2021-11-10

2.  Effect of infiltrating nasal packing with local anesthetics in postoperative pain and anxiety following sinonasal surgeries: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Shao-Chen Tsai; Ming-Tang Lai; Yi-Lin Kao; Chia-Che Wu
Journal:  Braz J Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2020-02-12
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.