MedElevator
Войти в исследования The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2025
Postoperative Outcomes of Anterior Nasal Packing in Rhinoplasty: A Comparative Study.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
El Feghaly Charbel, Breidy Elie, Nassar Aref, Kassouf Elia, Aoudi Marc, Safieddine Maissa, Nasr Marwan, Sleilati Fadi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Rhinoplasty is a frequently performed plastic surgery, but it carries potential short- and long-term complications. Surgeons continuously seek ways to reduce these risks and enhance patient outcomes. Nasal packing is often used postoperatively, but its efficacy in improving recovery remains debated. This study aims to assess the impact of bilateral anterior nasal packing on early postoperative outcomes.
METHODS: In this prospective study, conducted from January to December 2023, 64 rhinoplasty patients were evaluated at Hôtel Dieu de France University Hospital. Twenty patients received short-term nasal packing with paraffin-soaked gauze, while 44 did not. Outcomes were assessed based on periorbital ecchymosis, edema, nasal obstruction, and the occurrence of septal hematomas and epistaxis.
RESULTS: At postoperative day 7, the packing group exhibited significantly more ecchymosis (mean score 3.65 versus 2.47; P = 0.017). However, no significant differences were noted for periorbital edema ( P = 0.471) or nasal obstruction ( P = 0.172). Postoperative epistaxis and septal hematomas occurred in 10% of patients in the packing group, compared with none in the nonpacking group, though these differences were not statistically significant ( P = 0.175).
CONCLUSION: Bilateral anterior nasal packing significantly increases ecchymosis after rhinoplasty without reducing other complications such as edema, nasal obstruction, epistaxis, or septal hematomas. These findings suggest that nasal packing may not be beneficial and should be avoided.
METHODS: In this prospective study, conducted from January to December 2023, 64 rhinoplasty patients were evaluated at Hôtel Dieu de France University Hospital. Twenty patients received short-term nasal packing with paraffin-soaked gauze, while 44 did not. Outcomes were assessed based on periorbital ecchymosis, edema, nasal obstruction, and the occurrence of septal hematomas and epistaxis.
RESULTS: At postoperative day 7, the packing group exhibited significantly more ecchymosis (mean score 3.65 versus 2.47; P = 0.017). However, no significant differences were noted for periorbital edema ( P = 0.471) or nasal obstruction ( P = 0.172). Postoperative epistaxis and septal hematomas occurred in 10% of patients in the packing group, compared with none in the nonpacking group, though these differences were not statistically significant ( P = 0.175).
CONCLUSION: Bilateral anterior nasal packing significantly increases ecchymosis after rhinoplasty without reducing other complications such as edema, nasal obstruction, epistaxis, or septal hematomas. These findings suggest that nasal packing may not be beneficial and should be avoided.