Otorhinolaryngology Department, Prof. Dr. Cemil Tascioglu City Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Bulanik State Hospital, Zafer Mahallesi, Yeni Hastane Caddesi, 49530, Bulanık, Muş, Turkey.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2022 Jan;279(1):267-273. doi: 10.1007/s00405-021-06854-x. Epub 2021 May 10.
This clinical trial aimed to investigate the effects of different nasal packing methods and transseptal suture technique on swallowing after septoplasty.
This randomized prospective study consists of 180 consecutive patients with septal deviation. All the patients underwent septoplasty. All the patients were randomly assigned to three groups. In group A, transseptal sutures were used for septal stabilization. In group B, both nasal passages were packed with Merocel tampons for septal stabilization. In group C, both nasal passages were packed with Doyle silicone splints for septal stabilization. For the evaluation of swallowing, the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) questionnaire and a visual analog scale (VAS) were administered to all the patients preoperatively and on the second and seventh postoperative days.
One hundred and twenty two of the patients (67.7%) were female and 58 of them (32.2%) were male. The mean age was 32.41 ± 12.37 years (range: 18-57 years). Both EAT-10 and VAS scores on the second postoperative day were significantly higher than the preoperative scores in all the groups (p < 0.05). The transseptal suture group had significantly lower EAT-10 and VAS scores on the second postoperative day than the Merocel packing and silicone packing groups (p < 0.05). Both EAT-10 and VAS scores on the postop 7th day significantly decreased in all groups compared to the postop second day (p < 0.05).
Septoplasty affects swallowing, regardless of whether a tampon is applied. Transeptal suturing has a lesser effect on swallowing than other techniques. Although silicone packing is a less invasive method, it negatively affects swallowing, similar to Merocel packing. The transseptal suture technique is more comfortable than the other techniques in terms of swallowing function in the postoperative period.
本临床试验旨在研究不同鼻腔填塞方法和鼻中隔缝合技术对鼻中隔成形术后吞咽的影响。
这是一项随机前瞻性研究,共纳入 180 例鼻中隔偏曲患者。所有患者均行鼻中隔成形术。所有患者均随机分为三组。A 组采用鼻中隔缝线固定鼻中隔,B 组双侧鼻腔均用 Merocel 止血海绵填塞固定鼻中隔,C 组双侧鼻腔均用 Doyle 硅胶夹板填塞固定鼻中隔。采用 Eating Assessment Tool(EAT-10)问卷和视觉模拟评分(VAS)评估所有患者术前及术后第 2、7 天的吞咽情况。
122 例患者(67.7%)为女性,58 例(32.2%)为男性。平均年龄为 32.41±12.37 岁(18-57 岁)。三组患者术后第 2 天 EAT-10 和 VAS 评分均明显高于术前(p<0.05)。与 Merocel 填塞组和硅胶填塞组相比,鼻中隔缝线组术后第 2 天 EAT-10 和 VAS 评分明显更低(p<0.05)。与术后第 2 天相比,三组患者术后第 7 天 EAT-10 和 VAS 评分均明显降低(p<0.05)。
鼻中隔成形术会影响吞咽功能,无论是否填塞。鼻中隔缝合对吞咽的影响小于其他技术。尽管硅胶填塞是一种侵袭性较小的方法,但与 Merocel 填塞一样,会对吞咽产生负面影响。与其他技术相比,鼻中隔缝线技术在术后吞咽功能方面更舒适。