Cargando…
Merocel versus Nasopore for Nasal Packing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes, including efficacy and complications, of Merocel versus Nasopore as a nasal packing material after nasal surgery. METHODS: Relevant randomized controlled trials were identified from electronic databases (The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, China Nationa...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3977961/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24710428 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093959 |
_version_ | 1782310485824110592 |
---|---|
author | Wang, Jianzhang Cai, Changping Wang, Shili |
author_facet | Wang, Jianzhang Cai, Changping Wang, Shili |
author_sort | Wang, Jianzhang |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes, including efficacy and complications, of Merocel versus Nasopore as a nasal packing material after nasal surgery. METHODS: Relevant randomized controlled trials were identified from electronic databases (The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Chinese Biomedical Database). Conference proceedings and references from identified trials and review articles were also searched. Outcome measures were pain during nasal packing, pain and bleeding upon packing removal, pressure sensation, nasal blockage, formation of synechiae, mucosal healing, and patients' general satisfaction. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials met criteria for analysis. Compared with Merocel, Nasopore significantly reduced patients' subjective symptoms including in situ pain (pain experienced while packing is in place), nasal pressure, pain and bleeding during packing removal, and increased patients' general satisfaction with nasal packing. There were no significant differences in nasal obstruction, adhesion and mucosal healing between the Merocel and Nasopore groups. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary evidence suggests that Nasopore may be superior to Merocel as a nasal packing material with regard to in situ pain, pain and bleeding upon removal, pressure, and general satisfaction and does not differ from Merocel in terms of nasal obstruction, tissue adhesion, and long-term mucosal healing. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3977961 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-39779612014-04-11 Merocel versus Nasopore for Nasal Packing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Wang, Jianzhang Cai, Changping Wang, Shili PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes, including efficacy and complications, of Merocel versus Nasopore as a nasal packing material after nasal surgery. METHODS: Relevant randomized controlled trials were identified from electronic databases (The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Chinese Biomedical Database). Conference proceedings and references from identified trials and review articles were also searched. Outcome measures were pain during nasal packing, pain and bleeding upon packing removal, pressure sensation, nasal blockage, formation of synechiae, mucosal healing, and patients' general satisfaction. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials met criteria for analysis. Compared with Merocel, Nasopore significantly reduced patients' subjective symptoms including in situ pain (pain experienced while packing is in place), nasal pressure, pain and bleeding during packing removal, and increased patients' general satisfaction with nasal packing. There were no significant differences in nasal obstruction, adhesion and mucosal healing between the Merocel and Nasopore groups. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary evidence suggests that Nasopore may be superior to Merocel as a nasal packing material with regard to in situ pain, pain and bleeding upon removal, pressure, and general satisfaction and does not differ from Merocel in terms of nasal obstruction, tissue adhesion, and long-term mucosal healing. Public Library of Science 2014-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3977961/ /pubmed/24710428 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093959 Text en © 2014 Wang et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Wang, Jianzhang Cai, Changping Wang, Shili Merocel versus Nasopore for Nasal Packing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
title | Merocel versus Nasopore for Nasal Packing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_full | Merocel versus Nasopore for Nasal Packing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_fullStr | Merocel versus Nasopore for Nasal Packing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Merocel versus Nasopore for Nasal Packing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_short | Merocel versus Nasopore for Nasal Packing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_sort | merocel versus nasopore for nasal packing: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3977961/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24710428 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093959 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wangjianzhang merocelversusnasoporefornasalpackingametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT caichangping merocelversusnasoporefornasalpackingametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT wangshili merocelversusnasoporefornasalpackingametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials |