The Usefulness of Nasal Packing with Vaseline Gauze and Airway Silicone Splint after Closed Reduction of Nasal Bone Fracture.
10.5999/aps.2012.39.6.612
- Author:
Hyo Young KIM
1
;
Sin Rak KIM
;
Jin Hyung PARK
;
Yea Sik HAN
Author Information
1. Department of Plastic Surgery, Kosin University Gospel Hospital, Kosin University School of Medicine, Busan, Korea. hanplastic1@naver.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Nasal surgical procedures;
Nasal bone;
Airway management
- MeSH:
Airway Management;
Deglutition;
Dimethylpolysiloxanes;
Headache;
Humans;
Mouth;
Nasal Bone;
Nasal Cavity;
Nasal Obstruction;
Nasal Surgical Procedures;
Petrolatum;
Porifera;
Respiration;
Silicones;
Spirometry;
Splints;
Ventilation;
Weights and Measures
- From:Archives of Plastic Surgery
2012;39(6):612-617
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Packing after closed reduction of a nasal bone fracture causes inconvenient nasal obstruction in patients. We packed the superior meatus with Vaseline gauze to support the nasal bone, and packed the middle nasal meatus with a Doyle Combo Splint consisting of an airway tube, a silastic sheet, and an expandable sponge to reduce the inconvenience. In addition, we aimed to objectively identify whether this method not only enables nasal respiration but also sufficiently supports the reduced nasal bone. METHODS: Nasal ventilation was measured via spirometry 1 day before surgery and compared to 1 day after surgery. To compare support of the reduced nasal bone by the 2 methods, 2 plastic surgeons assessed the displacementon X-rays taken after the surgery and after removing the packing. The extent of nasal obstruction, dry mouth, sleep disturbance, headache, and swallowing difficulty were compared with visual analog scales (VAS) on a pre-discharge survey. RESULTS: In the experimental group, the nasal respiration volume 1 day after surgery remained at 71.3%+/-6.84% on average compared to 1 day prior to surgery. Support of the reduced bone in the experimental group (2.80+/-0.4) was not significantly different from the control group (2.88+/-0.33). The VAS scores for all survey items were lower in the experimental group than in the control group, where a lower score indicated a lower level of inconvenience. CONCLUSIONS: The nasal cavity packing described here maintained objective measures of nasal respiration and supported the reduced bone similar to conventional methods. Maintaining nasal respiration reduced the inconvenience to patients, which demonstrates that this packing method is useful.
