SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Otolarengoloji Arşivi / 2001 / Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 1

Effects of three different nasal packing materials on postoperative nasal mucocillary clearence after septoplasty

Septoplastide kullanılan üç farklı nazal tamponun postoperatif nazal mukosiliyer klirens üzerine etkileri

Erdoğan AKMAN
Arif ŞANLI
Şeref ÜNVER
Ozan Seymen SEZEN
Pages
25–29
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Merocell(r), and silicone nasal splints were found to be more beneficial than extraphore nasal packing on nasal mucociliary clearence.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: To evaluate effect of three different nasal packings on postoperative nasal mucociliary clearence after septoplasty using sintigraphic studies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Patients: The study included 24 patients in whom septoplasty was performed.Materials and Methods: Patients that performed septoplasty were classified in three groups.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Merocell(r), and silicone nasal splints were found to be more beneficial than extraphore nasal packing on nasal mucociliary clearence.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate effect of three different nasal packings on postoperative nasal mucociliary clearence after septoplasty using sintigraphic studies. Patients: The study included 24 patients in whom septoplasty was performed.Materials and Methods: Patients that performed septoplasty were classified in three groups. Three different nasal packing material were applied postoperatively (extraphore nasal packing, Merocell(r), silicone nasal splint). Effects of these materials on mucociliary clearence were evaluated by performing sintigraphic studies wit Tc99m, pre and postoperatively.Results: Postoperative mucociliary clearence times were 10.12 ± 2.58 minutes in extraphore nasal packing group, 8.62± 2.66 minutes in Merocell(r), group and 8.12±2.58 minutes in silicone nasal splint group. Conclusion: Merocell(r), and silicone nasal splints were found to be more beneficial than extraphore nasal packing on nasal mucociliary clearence.

Özet

Amaç: Septoplasti sonrasında uygulanan üç farklı nazal tamponun, postoperatif nazal mukosiliyer klirens üzerine etkilerinin sintigrafik tetkiklerle değerlendirilmesi. Hastalar: Çalışmaya septoplasti uygulanan 24 hasta alındı.Yöntemler: Septoplasti uygulanan hastalar üç gruba ayrıldı. Üç farklı tampon materyali postoperatif dönemde kullanıldı (ekstrafor tampon, Merocell(r) tampon, silikon nazal splint). Her üç grupta preoperatif ve postoperatif dönemde, Tc99m kullanılarak yapılan sintigrafik tetkiklerle, bu materyallerin mukosiliyer klirens üzerine etkileri araştırıldı.Bulgular: Postoperatif mukosiliyer klirens süreleri, ekstrafor tampon kullanılan grupta 10.12± 2.58 dk, Merocell(r) tampon kullanılan grupta 8.62 ± 2.66 dk, silikon nazal splint kullanılan grupta 8.12± 2.58 dk olarak saptandı.Sonuç: Merocell(r) tampon ve silikon nazal splintin, nazal mukosiliyer klirensin düzelmesinde ekstrafor tampona göre daha faydalı olduğu tespit edildi.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKMAN, E., ŞANLI, A., ÜNVER, Ş., SEZEN, O. S. (2022). Effects of three different nasal packing materials on postoperative nasal mucocillary clearence after septoplasty. Türk Otolarengoloji Arşivi, Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 1, 25–29. https://ajindex.com/articles/640125

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (20)

  1. David B. The nasal septum. Scott-Brown’s Otolaryngology’de. Ed. Alan GK. Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann, 1987; 157-8
  2. Gilchrist AG. Surgery of the nasal septum and pyramid. J Laryn- gol Otol 1974; 88(8): 759-71
  3. Ginzel A, Illum P. Nasal mucociliary clearance in patients with septal deviation. Rhinology 1980; 18(4): 177-81
  4. Watson MG, Campbell JB, Shenoi PM. Nasal surgery; does the type of nasal pack influence the results. Rhinology 1989; 27(2): 105-11
  5. Donald PJ. Postoperative care of the rhinoplasty patient. Otolaryn- gol Clin North Am 1975; 8(3): 797-806
  6. Leibzig BL, Suen CY. Nose bleds. Emergencies in Otolaryngo- logy’de. Ed. Suen SY, Vietmore SJ. Newyork, Churchill-Livingstone Inc., 1986; 157-75
  7. Lindberg S, Runer T. Method for in vivo measurement of muco- ciliary actvity in the human nose. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1994; 103(7): 558-66
  8. Stringer SP, Stiles W, Slattery WH 3rd, ve ark. Nasal mucocili- ary clearance after radiation therapy. Laryngoscope 1995; 105(4 Pt 1): 380-2
  9. Tos M. Mucus production in the infected nose and paranasal sinu- ses. Rhinology 1984; 22(2): 109-10
  10. Kao CH, Jiang RS, Wang SJ, Yeh SH. Influence of age, gender and ethnicity on nasal mucociliary clearance function. Clin Nucl Med 1994; 19(9): 813-6
  11. Puchell E, Aug F, Pham QT, Bertrand A. Comprasion of methods for measuring nasal mucociliary clearance in man. Acta Otolaryn- gol 1981; 91(3-4): 297-303
  12. Mann W. Eine neue Möglichkeit der endonasalen, postoperativen Wundversorgung. Laryngol Rhinol Otol (Stuttg) 1979; 58(1): 50-3
  13. Wullstein SR. Die Septumplastik bzw. submuköse Septumrezekti- on ohne postoperative Nasentamponade. HNO 1979; 27(9): 322-4
  14. Thomas S, Baird IM, Frazier RD. Toxic shock syndrome follo- wing submucous resection and rhinoplasty. JAMA 1982; 247(17): 2402-3
  15. Fairbanks DN. Complications of nasal packing. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1986; 94(3): 412-5
  16. De Vries N, Van Der Baan S. Toxic shock syndrome after nasal surgery: is prevention possible? A case report and review of litera- ture. Rhinology 1989; 27(2): 125-8
  17. Reiter D, Alford E, Jabourian Z. Alternatives to packing in sep- torhinoplasty. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1989; 115(10): 1203-5
  18. Thompson AC, Crowther JA. Effect of nasal packing on eustac- hian tube function. J Laryngol Otol 1991; 105(7): 539-40
  19. Spillmann T. Aspiration von Nasentamponaden mit Todesfolge. Laryngol Rhinol Otol (Stuttg) 1981; 60(1): 56-9
  20. Campbell JB, Watson MG, She