Milton Keynes General Hospital, Milton Keynes, UK.
Rhinology. 2011 Oct;49(4):470-3. doi: 10.4193/Rhino11.010.
Despite the popularity of Rapid Rhino packs, there are no clear guidelines regarding the volume of air to be inflated when used in the management of epistaxis. The manufacturers suggest that subjective assessment by pilot cuff palpation is used to guide inflation. However, studies have clearly demonstrated that clinicians are poor at judging balloon pressure by pilot cuff palpation when used in other settings. Our objective was to investigate the relationship between the volume of air inflated and the resultant intra-nasal pressure generated by nasal balloon packing. Twelve healthy subjects were packed with 5.5 cm Rapid Rhino packs, which were connected to a manometer and 20 ml syringe via a 3-way tap in a closed circuit. Increments of 2.5 mls of air were inflated and the resultant intra-nasal pack pressure was measured. There appeared to be a linear relationship between increasing volume and pack pressure. However, between individuals, there was a large variation in the intra-nasal pack pressure produced for a given fixed volume of air inflated. This is presumably due to variations in nasal anatomy. It may be that a manometer-measured, pressure guided nasal pack inflation technique would represent best practice, especially for less experienced staff.
尽管 Rapid Rhino 气囊套件广受欢迎，但在用于治疗鼻出血时，关于充气量的具体指导意见并不明确。制造商建议通过触摸气囊导气管来进行主观评估，以此指导充气量。然而，已有研究明确表明，在其他应用场景中，临床医生通过触摸气囊导气管来判断气囊压力的能力较差。我们的研究目的在于调查充气量与鼻腔气囊填塞所产生的鼻腔内压力之间的关系。12 名健康志愿者使用 5.5cm Rapid Rhino 气囊套件进行鼻腔填塞，套件通过三通阀与压力计和 20ml 注射器相连，形成一个密闭回路。每次向气囊内充气 2.5ml，测量产生的鼻腔内压力。充气量与鼻腔内压力之间似乎存在线性关系。然而，对于相同的充气量，不同个体产生的鼻腔内压力差异较大。这可能是由于鼻腔解剖结构的差异所致。因此，使用压力计测量并指导鼻腔气囊填塞的充气技术可能是最佳实践，尤其是对经验不足的医护人员而言。
