ReviewEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2026
Clinical utility of additional non-absorbable nasal packing after septoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated the clinical utility of additional non-absorbable nasal packing when combined with transseptal suturing or septal splints.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using two analytical frameworks: septal suture plus non-absorbable packing versus septal suture alone or septal suture with absorbable packing, and septal splint plus non-absorbable packing versus septal splint alone or packing alone. Outcomes of interest included postoperative bleeding, septal hematoma, adhesion/synechia formation, postoperative pain, headache, and sleep disturbance.
resultsIn the suture-based analysis, additional non-absorbable packing did not significantly reduce postoperative bleeding or septal hematoma formation but was associated with higher rates of headache (odds ratio [OR]: 40.06, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 16.05-99.99) and synechia formation (OR: 2.79, 95% CI: 1.00-7.77). In the splint-based analysis, additional packing did not significantly reduce postoperative hemorrhage or overall adhesion rates. Although splint plus packing reduced adhesion formation compared with packing alone, no advantage was observed compared with splint-only treatment. Additional packing was also associated with significantly higher postoperative pain scores on postoperative days 1 and 7.
conclusionsAdditional non-absorbable nasal packing after septoplasty provides no consistent clinical benefit when effective septal stabilization has already been achieved and is associated with increased postoperative discomfort. These findings do not support the routine use of additional non-absorbable nasal packing following contemporary septoplasty.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42867663What 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.