[Clinical efficacy of rapid Rhino Stammberger sinus dressing following endoscopic sinus surgery]

To compare the clinical benefits of rapid Rhino Stammberger sinus dressing (RR), a new nasal packing material for functional endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), with traditional packing materials sorbalgon plus Vaseline gauze (SV) prospectively.

Twenty-four patients with chronic sinusitis of the similar grade were enrolled in the study. After ESS, the nasal cavities of each patient were packed with RR in the right side as observing group and SV in the left side as control group. SV in the left nasal cavity was removed in the first day after operation and RR remained in the right nasal cavity until the first endoscopic follow-up 1 week postoperatively. The same perioperative treatments such as irrigation and local steroid were given in both sides of nasal cavities. The grade of rhinalgia, nasal obstruction, discharge, bleeding and epiphora in each side of nasal cavities were assessed on a visual analogue scale (VAS) by the patients at the operation day (packing period), the first day and the second day after operation respectively. Postoperative endoscopic assessment of nasal cavities including crust, discharge, pseudomembrane, edema of mucosa, bubble and ostium obstruction were carried out by a rhinologist on VAS at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 weeks postoperatively. The follow-up continued until the complete mucosal healing.

Three patients were dropped from statistical analysis. One of them with severe hypertension bleeding when he awoke from anesthesia, the RR was run out from the nasal cavity. The other two were lost in the follow-up. Twenty-one patients completed the follow -up ranging between 2-20 months. The scores of rhinalgia, epiphora at the operation day and the rhinalgia at the first day after operation in RR side were lower than SV side (P<0.05). The scores of the amount of crust at the first week after operation in RR side were lower than SV side (P<0.05). Statistically, no significant deference was found between RR and SV in the length of mucosal healing period.

Patients felt more comfortable with the package of RR than traditional material. No pain and secondary bleeding happened. The efficacy of RR on mucosal healing was similar with SV. RR showed some advantages and could be used as packing material following ESS.