3.8 Article

Triamcinolone Impregnated Nasal Pack in Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: Our Experience

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER INDIA
DOI: 10.1007/s12070-016-1041-x

Keywords

Triamcinolone; Topical steroids; Steroid nasal pack; Endoscopic sinus surgery; Crusting; Recurrent nasal polyposis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The selection of an effective packing method to prevent postoperative complications and recurrence following Endoscopic Sinus Surgery remains ambiguous at present. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of Triamcinolone impregnated nasal pack in Endoscopic Sinus Surgery, in the prevention of postoperative crusting, edema, infection and recurrence. This study was an interventional randomized placebo-controlled study, conducted at a tertiary care centre in South India between February 2015 and May 2016, after getting approval from Institute Ethical Committee. 75 patients with bilateral chronic rhinosinusitis undergoing Endoscopic Sinus Surgery were selected for the study. After surgery, each patient was randomized to receive Polyvinyl Acetal (Merocel) nasal pack soaked with Triamcinolone to one side, while the contralateral side was packed with Merocel soaked with saline. Incidence of postoperative crusting, edema, polypoidal change and mucosal discharge was evaluated using the Endoscopic Staging System at 1st and 2nd weeks and at 1st and 3rd months of surgery. A significant reduction in mucosal edema was observed in the test group at all stages of follow up (p values < 0.05). Incidence of crusting was found to be significantly lower in the test group (p values < 0.05) except at 3 months (p value > 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the occurrence of polypoidal change and mucosal discharge between the groups. Triamcinolone impregnated nasal pack is an effective method to reduce the incidence of early postoperative complications following Endoscopic Sinus Surgery.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available