Efficacy and Safety of Guardcel Nasal Packing After Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: A Prospective, Single-Blind, Randomized Controlled Study

OBJECTIVES: Nasal packing after endoscopic sinus surgery is frequently used to control postoperative bleeding, enhance the wound healing process, and prevent lateralization of the middle turbinate, which causes insufficient ventilation. Many biodegradable materials have been developed to reduce pain and mucosal damage during packing removal. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of Guardcel (Genewel Co.) middle meatal packing with a traditional nonabsorbable middle meatal packing, Merocel (Medtronic Xomed), on wound healing and patient satisfaction. METHODS: In this prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled study, we enrolled 32 consecutive patients (64 nostrils) undergoing bilateral endoscopic sinus surgery at Korea University Guro Hospital from February 2015 to August 2015. Guardcel and Merocel were inserted postoperatively into a randomly assigned side. Objective findings about bleeding, hemostasis, adhesion, and infection were evaluated with nasal endoscopy. Patients’ symptoms including pain and nasal obstruction were evaluated with a visual analog scale. Each evaluation was done at 2–3 days, 1 week, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks after surgery. RESULTS: At 2–3 days after endoscopic sinus surgery, the Guardcel side had a significantly less hemostasis time than the Merocel side (P=0.001). During this period, the pain during packing removal was significantly lower on the Guardcel-inserted side than the Merocel-inserted side (P=0.002). At two weeks after surgery, the adhesion score on the Guardcel side was significantly lower than that of the Merocel side (P=0.011). Other parameters during the study follow-up periods were not statistically significant. There were no severe adverse reactions. CONCLUSION: Guardcel, a newly developed packing material, appeared to shorten the hemostasis time and reduce pain sensation at 2–3 days after surgery; it also prevented adhesion formation 2 weeks after surgery when compared with the control. Guardcel can be an effective and safe candidate to replace conventional packing materials after endoscopic sinus surgery.

Clinical Results of Nasopore(R) Nasal Packing on Endonasal Dacryocystorhinostomy

PURPOSE: To investigate the effects of Nasopore(R) as a nasal packing material on the surgical success rate and prevalence of postoperative complications after endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR). METHODS: The present study included a total of 558 patients (699 eyes) with primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction who underwent endonasal DCR; 227 eyes were packed with Nasopore(R) and 472 eyes were packed with Merocel(R). The surgical success rate and postoperative complications such as synechiae, granulation, wound healing (osteal mucosal epithelium epithelialization), postoperative bleeding, infection, and revision rate were compared between the packing materials. RESULTS: The surgical success rate of the Nasopore(R) group (99.1%, 98.6%) showed significantly better results than the Merocel(R) group (97.2%, 95.1%) at postoperative 1 and 3 months (p = 0.04, 0.03 Pearson chi-square test), whereas there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in postoperative surgical success rate at 1 week and 6 months. In comparison of postoperative complications, the Nasopore(R) group (0%) showed a lower incidence of delayed wound healing (delayed epithelialization of osteal mucosal epithelium) than the Merocel(R) group (2.3%; p = 0.013), whereas there was no difference in granulation, synechiae, postoperative bleeding, infection and revision rate (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Nasopore(R) group showed a lower proportion of delayed wound healing and improvement of the surgical success rate at an early postoperative period after endonasal DCR compared to non-absorbable nasal packing material.

Effects of Nasopore Packing on Dacryocystorhinostomy

PURPOSE: To investigate the effects of placement of the absorbable packing material Nasopore at the anastomosis site of newly formed mucosal flaps on postoperative re-bleeding, discomfort, and on the success rate of dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR). METHODS: A review of the medical records of patients with primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction that underwent external or endonasal DCR by a single surgeon was performed. The degree of re-bleeding, discomfort, and postoperative results, including anatomical success, functional success and postoperative nasal findings such as granulation, synechiae, and membrane formation were compared in patients whose anastomosis site was packed with either Nasopore or Merocel, a non-absorbable packing material. RESULTS: A total of 77 patients (101 eyes) were included. Of the 101 eyes, 30 were packed with Nasopore, while 71 were packed with Merocel. The Nasopore group showed significantly better results than the Merocel group in the degree of re-bleeding and the level of patient discomfort (p = 0.000, 0.039, respectively; Pearson's chi-square test), whereas there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in postoperative anatomical and functional success (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Nasopore significantly reduced postoperative nasal re-bleeding and patient discomfort during the early post-surgical period, but failed to show an effect on the postoperative anatomical and functional success of DCR.

Effects of Nasopore Packing on Dacryocystorhinostomy

PURPOSE: To investigate the effects of placement of the absorbable packing material Nasopore at the anastomosis site of newly formed mucosal flaps on postoperative re-bleeding, discomfort, and on the success rate of dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR). METHODS: A review of the medical records of patients with primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction that underwent external or endonasal DCR by a single surgeon was performed. The degree of re-bleeding, discomfort, and postoperative results, including anatomical success, functional success and postoperative nasal findings such as granulation, synechiae, and membrane formation were compared in patients whose anastomosis site was packed with either Nasopore or Merocel, a non-absorbable packing material. RESULTS: A total of 77 patients (101 eyes) were included. Of the 101 eyes, 30 were packed with Nasopore, while 71 were packed with Merocel. The Nasopore group showed significantly better results than the Merocel group in the degree of re-bleeding and the level of patient discomfort (p = 0.000, 0.039, respectively; Pearson's chi-square test), whereas there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in postoperative anatomical and functional success (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Nasopore significantly reduced postoperative nasal re-bleeding and patient discomfort during the early post-surgical period, but failed to show an effect on the postoperative anatomical and functional success of DCR.