Display options
Cite
Zou Y, Deng YQ, Xiao CW, et al. Comparison of outcomes between endoscopic surgery and conventional nasal packing for epistaxis in the posterior fornix of the inferior nasal meatus. Pak J Med Sci. 2015;31(6):1361-5doi: 10.12669/pjms.316.8340.
Zou, Y., Deng, Y. Q., Xiao, C. W., Kong, Y. G., Xu, Y., Tao, Z. Z., & Chen, S. M. (2015). Comparison of outcomes between endoscopic surgery and conventional nasal packing for epistaxis in the posterior fornix of the inferior nasal meatus. Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 31(6), 1361-5. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.316.8340
Zou, You, et al. "Comparison of outcomes between endoscopic surgery and conventional nasal packing for epistaxis in the posterior fornix of the inferior nasal meatus." Pakistan journal of medical sciences vol. 31,6 (2015): 1361-5. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.316.8340
Zou Y, Deng YQ, Xiao CW, Kong YG, Xu Y, Tao ZZ, Chen SM. Comparison of outcomes between endoscopic surgery and conventional nasal packing for epistaxis in the posterior fornix of the inferior nasal meatus. Pak J Med Sci. 2015 Nov-Dec;31(6):1361-5. doi: 10.12669/pjms.316.8340. PMID: 26870097; PMCID: PMC4744282.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Pak J Med Sci. 2015 Nov-Dec;31(6):1361-5. doi: 10.12669/pjms.316.8340.

Comparison of outcomes between endoscopic surgery and conventional nasal packing for epistaxis in the posterior fornix of the inferior nasal meatus.

Pakistan journal of medical sciences

You Zou, Yu-Qin Deng, Chang-Wu Xiao, Yong-Gang Kong, Yu Xu, Ze-Zhang Tao, Shi-Ming Chen

Affiliations

  1. You Zou, Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
  2. Yu-Qin Deng, Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
  3. Chang-Wu Xiao, Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
  4. Yong-Gang Kong, Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
  5. Yu Xu, Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
  6. Ze-Zhang Tao, Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
  7. Shi-Ming Chen, Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.

PMID: 26870097 PMCID: PMC4744282 DOI: 10.12669/pjms.316.8340

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical features of epistaxis in the posterior fornix of the inferior nasal meatus and compare the treatment outcomes of endoscopic surgery and conventional nasal packing for this intractable form of epistaxis.

METHODS: Between August 2011 and August 2014, the medical records of 53 adult patients with idiopathic epistaxis in the posterior fornix of the inferior nasal meatus diagnosed by nasal endoscopy were obtained from our department. Of these, 38 patients underwent endoscopic surgery (surgery group) and 15 received a nasal pack (packing group). The patients' background characteristics, incidence of re-bleeding, extent of discomfort after treatment as assessed using a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) and incidence of nasal cavity adhesion after treatment were analysed.

RESULTS: There were no significant differences in background characteristics between the two groups. The incidence of re-bleeding (0/38 vs. 4/15, surgery vs. control, P = 0.001), VAS score for discomfort (2.4 ± 1.4 vs. 7.6 ± 1.0, surgery vs. control, P = 0.001) and incidence of nasal cavity adhesion after treatment (2/38 vs. 7/15, surgery vs. control, P = 0.007) were significantly lower in the surgery group than in the packing group.

CONCLUSION: Endoscopic surgery is superior to conventional nasal packing for the management of epistaxis in the posterior fornix of the inferior nasal meatus. During surgery, it is crucial to expose the bleeding sites by shifting the inferior turbinate inward by fracture.

Keywords: Electrocautery; Endoscopy; Epistaxis; Inferior nasal meatus; Posterior fornix

References

  1. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2012 Jan-Feb;26(1):55-60 - PubMed
  2. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011 Feb;19(1):30-5 - PubMed
  3. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2013 Jan-Feb;79(1):122 - PubMed
  4. Laryngoscope. 2005 May;115(5):899-902 - PubMed
  5. Postgrad Med J. 2005 May;81(955):309-14 - PubMed
  6. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006 Mar;64(3):511-8 - PubMed
  7. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2012 Jul-Aug;6(4):291-5 - PubMed
  8. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011 Apr;63(2):141-4 - PubMed
  9. J Neurointerv Surg. 2013 Mar;5(2):151-6 - PubMed
  10. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 2004 Dec;29(6):754-7 - PubMed
  11. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996 Jan;122(1):24-34 - PubMed
  12. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2014 Feb;34(1):1-8 - PubMed
  13. Laryngoscope. 2008 Jan;118(1):156-61 - PubMed
  14. Ann Afr Med. 2008 Sep;7(3):107-11 - PubMed

Publication Types