ArticleInternational archives of otorhinolaryngology2025
Nasal Foam Packing for Epistaxis: What are the Ideal Characteristics?
Article in International archives of otorhinolaryngology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Epistaxis is a common otorhinolaryngological emergency, usually caused by digital trauma in children, and hypertension in the elderly. General practitioners in emergency rooms assist most of the cases without specific management. Objectives: Describe suitable properties for efficient nasal packing in adult epistaxis. Methods: Two cadaver heads, preserved by freezing process, were thawed for this research. When the room temperature was reached, the nasal cavities were evaluated by a nasal endoscope, which showed a length of 4.0 × 11.0 cm for the male and 4.0 × 8.5 cm for the female head. Through an orifice made in the left maxillary bone to access the maxillary sinus, a blue-dyed saline solution was applied using a sphygmomanometer (Premium) to control and mimic blood pressure. The nasal cavity was first packed with two foams with different thicknesses and densities evolved by a condom, then packed by the Merocel packing (Medtronicent Surgical Products Inc.). The pressure was administered and gradually increased until a saline leak was observed in the oropharynx. The best way to insert tampons was also evaluated to avoid extensive trauma. Results: Despite the difficulty of the application being similar in both nasal packings made with the condom and foam, t33-densityity foam, 2.0 cm thick and 11.0 cm lon resisted to a higher pressure (250mmHg) than the commercial packing Merocel (220mmHg). Conclusion: The most suitable foam for packaging wrapped with condoms is 2.0 cm thick, as it supported the blood pressure commonly found in epistaxis.
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.