Absorbable and nonabsorbable packing after functional endoscopic sinus surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes

The purpose of the study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to compare the efficacy (and other postoperative outcomes) of nonabsorbable versus absorbable nasal packing after functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis. Studies were considered for inclusion if they were published in English language, were randomized clinical trials, and reported on outcomes following postoperative synechia. The primary outcome for meta-analysis was the incidence of postoperative synechia; pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed-effects models. Five studies, involving 241 nasal cavities in each treatment group, were included in the systematic review. The prevalence of synechia ranged from 4.6 to 8.0 % in the absorbable groups and from 8.0 to 35.7 % in the nonabsorbable groups. Postoperative bleeding was lower in the absorbable groups, whereas there was no clear finding regarding postoperative pain. Postoperative edema was generally similar between groups. There were no consistent findings regarding bleeding and pain on packing removal. Two studies using the same type of packing material were included in the meta-analysis. The combined OR (0.33, 95 % CI 0.04–2.78) for postoperative synechia did not significantly favor (P = 0.308) absorbable packing over nonabsorbable packing. Although there is some evidence in the available literature that absorbable nasal packing may provide superior outcomes to nonabsorbable packing after FESS, the lack of homogeneity between studies makes definitive conclusions impossible. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to compare the efficacy of different types of absorbable nasal packing for preventing synechia after FESS.