Advances in absorbable biomaterials and nasal packing.

Department of Surgery-Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University of Adelaide, 28 Woodville Road, Woodville, Adelaide, SA 5011, Australia.
Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America (Impact Factor: 1.34). 10/2009; 42(5):813-28, ix. DOI: 10.1016/j.otc.2009.07.009
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Absorbable biomaterials are commonly used after endoscopic sinus surgery, both for hemostatic and wound healing considerations. Although removable nasal packing is the traditional method of controlling ongoing bleeding and modulating wound healing, it is uncomfortable for patients and associated with several complications. Currently available absorbable agents frequently incite an inflammatory reaction and have been shown in animal and human trials to adversely affect the wound healing process. Newer agents offer distinct advantages because of their unique composition and rapid clearance profiles. The selection of packing material used in any given sinus procedure should be based on surgeon preference and the details of the specific case.

1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Nasal packing is often used after functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). Variousnon-absorbable agents are used but these packs can be uncomfortable and cause pain and bleeding on removal. Increasingly, biodegradable nasal packs are being used and have shown promising effects on post-operative bleeding and healing after FESS. Aim: We evaluate the safety and efficacy of biodegradable Nasopore ® (polyurethane glycol) in FESS, particularly in the day-case setting. . Methods: A retrospective chart review of 100 consecutive patients receiving Nasopore following FESS. Results: Our patients had chronic rhinosinusitis not responding to medical therapy and the extent of the surgery was determined by the extent of disease. Procedures performed in addition to FESS included septoplasty, trimming of the inferior turbinates and polypectomy. Approximately half of patients were discharged home the same day and post-operative complications were minimal. Only two patients developed post-operative bleeding, and four reported post-operative sinus infection requiring oral antibiotics. One patient developed minor intranasal adhesions of no functional significance. Conclusions: Nasopore is a safe and effective option after FESS. It is associated with minimal discomfort, no pain on removal and few post-operative complications. Nasopore is useful in achieving day-case FESS. Keywords Epistaxis; Sinusitis; Nasal polyps; Rhinitis; Haemostatic technique; Paranasal sinus Disease; Endoscopy; Surgery induced tissue adhesions.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To show the efficacy and comfort of pneumatic bag packing after the endoscopic nasal surgery. Pneumatic bag packing may be recommendable in terms of comfort and efficacy after endoscopic nasal surgery. Significant findings: There were statistical significant differences between the pneumatic bag packing and the expansive sponge packing regarding subjective symptoms and objective findings after surgery. Pneumatic bag packing may be recommendable in terms of comfort and efficacy after endoscopic nasal surgery.
    International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine 01/2015; 8(1):1558-60. · 1.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess biodegradable nasal packing effectiveness for improving postoperative symptoms and mucosal healing after endoscopic sinonasal surgery as compared with conventional/non-packing groups. Relevant articles were searched on PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared biodegradable packings with conventional packings or no packing, reporting postoperative symptoms and/or mucosal healing outcomes. This review included 19 studies, of which 11 compared biodegradable packings with conventional packings. Meta-analysis found that biodegradable packings significantly improved postoperative symptoms: bleeding at removal, pain at removal, pain in situ, and nasal blockage. Mucosal healing outcomes were inconsistent within studies, with no data could be pooled. Eight studies compared biodegradable packings with non-packing group. Postoperative symptom data in this comparison could not be pooled: A protective or equal effect on postoperative bleeding was reported in different studies; no difference was reported in pain status and nasal blockage. As for mucosal healing, meta-analysis showed that two arms of comparison had similar effect on synechiae, edema, infection and granulation at each time point. The limiting evidence suggests that biodegradable nasal packings are statistically better than conventional packings in postoperative symptoms, and probably comparable to non-packing group, as in this comparison we could not carry out meta-analysis. No beneficial or detrimental effect on postoperative mucosal healing could be determined based on existing evidence.
    PLoS ONE 12/2014; 9(12):e115458. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115458 · 3.53 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 27, 2014