ArticleAdolescent health, medicine and therapeutics2015
A comparative study of propranolol versus silver nitrate cautery in the treatment of recurrent primary epistaxis in children.
Article in Adolescent health, medicine and therapeutics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Local application of silver nitrate as an adjuvant treatment before deep lamellar keratoplasty for fungal keratitis poorly responsive to medical treatment.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- The Effect of Bevacizumab and Propranolol on Nasal Polyposis.International journal of clinical practice · 2022Article
- Article
- Recurrent epistaxis in children.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEpistaxis is a common medical problem in pediatric population. Although in most cases it is mild and self-limiting, a proportion of childhood epistaxis is massive, recurrent, or resistant to conventional management.
objectiveTo compare effectiveness of propranolol as a treatment option for childhood epistaxis versus conventional silver nitrate cautery. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY: This is a prospective interventional comparative study that was carried out during a period of 1 year (January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013) at Qena University Hospital and Assiut University Children's Hospital. One hundred children aged 6-12 years who presented with epistaxis to Qena University Hospital and Assiut University Children's Hospital during the study period and fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included in the study. They were randomly assigned into one of two interventional groups, where 50 children were treated with oral propranolol (propranolol treatment group) and another 50 children were treated with conventional silver nitrate cautery (cauterization treatment group) for their epistaxis. Propranolol was given at a dose of 1.5-2 mg/kg/day (divided into three doses). Patients were followed for 6 months after their discharge for recurrence of epistaxis.
resultsBoth groups of patients showed minimal recurrent epistaxis with rates of 14% for propranolol treated group and 12% for cauterization group, with no statistically significant difference between both groups. Local pain was found to be more in patients treated with silver nitrate cauterization.
conclusionTreatment of primary epistaxis with propranolol or silver nitrate cautery showed equal rates of recurrence, and local nasal pain was slightly more among silver nitrate cauterization treated group. Propranolol could be a favorable treatment option for patients with primary epistaxis. Further studies that include multiple centers and larger number of patients are recommended for more clarification of the effectiveness of such treatment option.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.