Objective To compare the therapeutic effect and clinical tolerance of endoscopic bipolar coagulation hemostasis(EBCH) and nasal packing(NP) in treatment of epistaxis.Methods The clinical data of 76 epistaxis patients treated with EBCH and 50 epistaxis patients treated with NP between Januaray 2009 and December 2011 were retrospectively analyzed.The two groups were matched in age,gender and bleeding sites.One time control rate of epistaxis,body tolerance,hospitalization time and recurrence rate were compared between the two groups.Results The one time control rate,body tolerance,hospitalization time and recurrence rate were 98.7％ (75/76),(2.91 ± 0.07),(4.11 ± 0.07) d and 2.63 ％ (2/76) respectively in EBCH group.The one time control rate,body tolerance,hospitalization time and recurrence rate were 72.0％ (36/50),(7.96 ± 0.10),(6.72 ± 0.13) d and 16.0％ (8/50) respectively in NP group.There were significant differences between the two groups.Conclusion The treatment of epistaxis with EBCH is better than NP on the therapeutic effect and clinical tolerance.The former method is a potential preferable choice for the treatment of clinical emergent epistaxis.

Adolescent ; Adult ; Craniotomy ; methods ; Female ; Forehead ; surgery ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Orbit ; surgery ; Young Adult ; Zygomatic Fractures ; surgery