Merocel versus a new septal clip with splint in post septal surgery cases: a prospective study

Jyoti Ranjan Das, Debangshu Ghosh
{"title":"Merocel versus a new septal clip with splint in post septal surgery cases: a prospective study","authors":"Jyoti Ranjan Das, Debangshu Ghosh","doi":"10.1186/s43163-024-00624-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Septoplasty is one of the most frequently performed surgical procedures in otorhinolaryngology to overcome nasal obstruction. Following septal surgery, nasal packs are commonly inserted by surgeons to support and appose septal flaps the types of which depend on the preference and experience of the surgeon. Background We conducted a study to compare the Merocel sponge with that of a newly developed septal clip with the splint in patients who underwent septoplasty or submucosal resection to find out which one is better. A total of 50 patients were included in the study over a period of 3 years. Patients were divided into 2 groups of 25 each where group M is for patients receiving Merocel after surgery and group C is for patients receiving septal clips with splints. Aim The aim of this study was to assess and compare the effects of a Merocel pack on nasal functions with that of the septal clip and their eventual complications and outcome in the post-operative period. Results The main observations that were found in both groups in the immediate postoperative period were (1) pain (2) nasal obstruction (3) sleep disturbance (4) headache (5) epiphora (6) dryness of mouth and (7) postnasal drip. Pain was mild to moderate in the case of group M (MPS was 2.4) and moderate to severe degree in the case of group C (MPS was 5.7). Nasal obstruction was more common in Merocel group patients. Sleep disturbance, headache, epiphora, post-nasal drip, and dryness of mouth were also more in the Merocel group. After pack removal in both groups, the nasal examination was done to see crusts, vestibulitis, and septal ulcers. All these findings were more in the septal clip with the splint group. Conclusions It was observed that Merocel nasal packing causes significant morbidity and discomfort in the immediate post-operative period as compared to septal clips. It is also expensive. The new septal clips with splints can be used as an effective alternative to Merocel for approximation of flaps after septal surgery.","PeriodicalId":501131,"journal":{"name":"The Egyptian Journal of Otolaryngology","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Egyptian Journal of Otolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43163-024-00624-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Septoplasty is one of the most frequently performed surgical procedures in otorhinolaryngology to overcome nasal obstruction. Following septal surgery, nasal packs are commonly inserted by surgeons to support and appose septal flaps the types of which depend on the preference and experience of the surgeon. Background We conducted a study to compare the Merocel sponge with that of a newly developed septal clip with the splint in patients who underwent septoplasty or submucosal resection to find out which one is better. A total of 50 patients were included in the study over a period of 3 years. Patients were divided into 2 groups of 25 each where group M is for patients receiving Merocel after surgery and group C is for patients receiving septal clips with splints. Aim The aim of this study was to assess and compare the effects of a Merocel pack on nasal functions with that of the septal clip and their eventual complications and outcome in the post-operative period. Results The main observations that were found in both groups in the immediate postoperative period were (1) pain (2) nasal obstruction (3) sleep disturbance (4) headache (5) epiphora (6) dryness of mouth and (7) postnasal drip. Pain was mild to moderate in the case of group M (MPS was 2.4) and moderate to severe degree in the case of group C (MPS was 5.7). Nasal obstruction was more common in Merocel group patients. Sleep disturbance, headache, epiphora, post-nasal drip, and dryness of mouth were also more in the Merocel group. After pack removal in both groups, the nasal examination was done to see crusts, vestibulitis, and septal ulcers. All these findings were more in the septal clip with the splint group. Conclusions It was observed that Merocel nasal packing causes significant morbidity and discomfort in the immediate post-operative period as compared to septal clips. It is also expensive. The new septal clips with splints can be used as an effective alternative to Merocel for approximation of flaps after septal surgery.
在鼻中隔术后病例中使用 Merocel 与带夹板的新型鼻中隔夹:一项前瞻性研究
鼻中隔成形术是耳鼻喉科最常见的外科手术之一,用于克服鼻腔阻塞。鼻中隔手术后,外科医生通常会插入鼻腔包来支撑和贴合鼻中隔皮瓣,其类型取决于外科医生的偏好和经验。研究背景 我们进行了一项研究,对接受鼻中隔成形术或粘膜下切除术的患者使用 Merocel 海绵和新开发的鼻中隔夹板进行比较,以找出哪种方法更好。研究共纳入 50 名患者,为期 3 年。患者被分为两组,每组 25 人,其中 M 组为术后接受美洛酮治疗的患者,C 组为接受鼻中隔夹板和夹板治疗的患者。目的 这项研究的目的是评估和比较美洛昔尔包与鼻中隔夹对鼻腔功能的影响,以及它们在术后最终出现的并发症和结果。结果 两组患者在术后初期的主要表现为:(1) 疼痛 (2) 鼻塞 (3) 睡眠障碍 (4) 头痛 (5) 口溢 (6) 口干和 (7) 鼻后滴流。M 组患者的疼痛程度为轻度至中度(MPS 为 2.4),C 组患者的疼痛程度为中度至重度(MPS 为 5.7)。美罗凯尔组患者的鼻塞更为常见。睡眠障碍、头痛、鼻出血、鼻后滴漏和口干等症状在美洛可尔组中也更为常见。两组患者在取下药包后,都要进行鼻腔检查,以发现结痂、前庭炎和鼻中隔溃疡。所有这些发现在鼻中隔夹板组中都较多。结论 观察发现,与鼻中隔夹片相比,美洛凝鼻腔填料在术后初期会造成严重的发病率和不适感。而且价格昂贵。带夹板的新型鼻中隔夹可作为 Merocel 的有效替代品,用于鼻中隔手术后的瓣膜逼近。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信