scholarly journals Timing of Removal of Nasal Pack Following Septoplasty

2020 ◽  
Vol 08 (08) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr Ishita Sen
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eman Sobh ◽  
Fatma Elhussieny ◽  
Taghreed Ismail

Abstract Background Nasal obstruction is a significant medical problem. This study aimed to examine the effect of nasal obstruction and nasal packing on arterial blood gases and pulmonary function indices, and the impact of the elimination of nasal obstruction on preoperative values. Results The mean age of the study population was 26.6 ± 10.1 years, males represented 50.8%. Spirometric indices showed statistically significant improvement (preoperative forced expiratory volume in 1st second 66.9 ± 13.9 vs 79.6 ± 14.9 postoperative and preoperative forced vital capacity 65.5 ± 12.7 vs 80.4 ± 13.8 postoperative). Oxygen saturation was significantly lower during nasal packing (95.6 ± 1.6 preoperative vs 94.7 ± 2.8 with nasal pack), and significant improvement (97.2 ± 1.4) was observed after removal of the nasal pack. Nasal obstruction scores significantly improved. Conclusion The results of this study indicate that either simple nasal obstruction or nasal packing may cause hypoxemia and abnormalities in lung function tests. Hypoxemia was more evident with nasal packing.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 80-83
Author(s):  
Ashish Dhakal ◽  
Bikash Lal Shrestha ◽  
Monika Pokharel

Background: Nasal packing is commonly done after septal surgeries. Nonabsorbable nasal pack is used to minimize bleeding from surgery site, support the mucoperichondrial flaps, and minimize the risk of formation of septal hematomas and adhesions. However, these materials cause pain and discomfort in-situ as well as during removal. This study was done to evaluate the effect of 2% lignocaine rehydration of nasal pack on pain during pack removal. Methods: This prospective study was conducted on 60 patients who had undergone septoplasty. The patients were divided into 2 groups: Lignocaine and Normal saline group, with 30 patients each. In the Lignocaine group, 2.5 ml of 2% of lignocaine was diluted with 2.5 ml of distilled water and was injected into the nasal pack; and in Normal saline group, 5 ml of normal saline was injected into the nasal pack. Nothing was injected to the left nostril, which acted as a control, in both groups. All patients were asked severity of pain during removal of nasal packing by VAS. Results: In lignocaine group, mean pain score was 3.73 ± 1.63 on lignocaine side and 6.23 ± 1.69 on control side (U=109.5, p<0.001). In Normal saline group, it was 6.5 ± 1.7 on normal saline side and 6.23 ± 1.96 on control side (U=425.5, p=0.711). On comparing VAS between lignocaine and normal saline group, pain was significantly lower in the lignocaine group (U=112.5, p<0.001) Conclusion: Rehydrating nasal pack with 2% topical lignocaine is a useful method to reduce pain during nasal pack removal.


2018 ◽  
Vol 08 (04) ◽  
pp. 226-230
Author(s):  
Amer Sabih Hydri ◽  
Muhammad Junaid Alam ◽  
Iqbal Hussain Udaipurwala ◽  
Furqan Mirza

Objective: To evaluate the anxiety experienced before, during and after conventional paraffin gauze nasal pack removal in patients operated under local versus general anesthesia. Study design: Comparative study. Place and duration of study: Department of ENT, Combined Military Hospital Sialkot and PAF Hospital Shorkot from July 2017 to June 2018. Material and methods: A total of 120 patients planned for Septoplasty were enrolled and divided into two groups. Sixty patients were to be operated under local anesthesia (Group A) while the other 60 were undergoing the same procedure under general anesthesia (Group B). Conventional paraffin gauze nasal packing was done for 24 hours in all 120 patients. Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) was used to determine the patients’ anxiety in both groups, 1 hour pre-operatively, immediately before and 1 hour after nasal pack removal. Results: The mean Hamilton Anxiety Scale assessment scores in both groups were of ‘mild’ category. The highest scores in both groups were observed immediately before nasal pack removal, with a range of 15-18, while the lowest scores in both groups were documented one hour after pack removal with a range of 13-16. Anxiety level in patients operated under general anesthesia was slightly lower than patients administered local anesthesia mean score of 16.40 ± 0.763 vs 17.21 ± 0.666 (p<0.001). Conclusion: Anxiety during nasal pack removal is mainly associated with prior pain experienced during nasal pack insertion. It is recommended that proper analgesia, adequate topical anesthesia, gentle insertion would make this process less distressing and will subsequently result in less anxiety at its removal.


2008 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 182-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.C. Dowley ◽  
N.S. Jones
Keyword(s):  

2017 ◽  
Vol 131 (12) ◽  
pp. 1065-1092 ◽  
Author(s):  
I Z Iqbal ◽  
G H Jones ◽  
N Dawe ◽  
C Mamais ◽  
M E Smith ◽  
...  

AbstractBackground:The mainstay of management of epistaxis refractory to first aid and cautery is intranasal packing. This review aimed to identify evidence surrounding nasal pack use.Method:A systematic review of the literature was performed using standardised methodology.Results:Twenty-seven eligible articles were identified relating to non-dissolvable packs and nine to dissolvable packs. Nasal packing appears to be more effective when applied by trained professionals. For non-dissolvable packs, the re-bleed rates for Rapid Rhino and Merocel were similar, but were higher with bismuth iodoform paraffin paste packing. Rapid Rhino packs were the most tolerated non-dissolvable packs. Evidence indicates that 96 per cent of re-bleeding occurs within the first 4 hours after nasal pack removal. Limited evidence suggests that dissolvable packs are effective and well tolerated by patients. There was a lack of evidence relating to: the duration of pack use, the economic effects of pack choice and the appropriate care setting for non-dissolvable packs.Conclusion:Rapid Rhino packs are the best tolerated, with efficacy equivalent to nasal tampons. FloSeal is easy to use, causes less discomfort and may be superior to Merocel in anterior epistaxis cases. There is no strong evidence to support prophylactic antibiotic use.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. e299-e302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ihsan Kuzucu ◽  
Guclu Kaan Beriat ◽  
Hande Ezerarslan ◽  
Sedat Ozdemir ◽  
Sinan Kocaturk

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document