The Laryngoscope · 2004
A comparative study of three methods of nasal irrigation.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Wormald Peter-John, Cain Tim, Oates Lyndell, Hawke Lianne, Wong Ian
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of three methods of nasal irrigation on distributing saline to the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses.
DESIGN: : A prospective, cross-over study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve subjects (9 patients with chronic sinusitis after functional endoscopic sinus surgery and 3 healthy controls) underwent nasal irrigation with normal saline containing Technetium 99m sulfur colloid. The distribution of radioactivity was assessed on each subject after three different irrigation techniques: metered nasal spray, nebulization with RinoFlow, and nasal douching while kneeling with the head on the floor.
RESULTS: The nasal cavity was well irrigated by all three techniques. Compared with the other two methods, douching was significantly more effective in penetrating the maxillary sinus (P = .036) and frontal recess (P = .003). The sphenoid and frontal sinuses were poorly irrigated by all three techniques.
CONCLUSION: Nasal douches are more effective in distributing irrigation solution to the maxillary sinus and frontal recess. This should be the method of choice for irrigating these areas.
DESIGN: : A prospective, cross-over study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve subjects (9 patients with chronic sinusitis after functional endoscopic sinus surgery and 3 healthy controls) underwent nasal irrigation with normal saline containing Technetium 99m sulfur colloid. The distribution of radioactivity was assessed on each subject after three different irrigation techniques: metered nasal spray, nebulization with RinoFlow, and nasal douching while kneeling with the head on the floor.
RESULTS: The nasal cavity was well irrigated by all three techniques. Compared with the other two methods, douching was significantly more effective in penetrating the maxillary sinus (P = .036) and frontal recess (P = .003). The sphenoid and frontal sinuses were poorly irrigated by all three techniques.
CONCLUSION: Nasal douches are more effective in distributing irrigation solution to the maxillary sinus and frontal recess. This should be the method of choice for irrigating these areas.