Comparison of purified plant polysaccharide (HemoStase) versus gelatin-thrombin matrix (FloSeal) in controlling bleeding during sinus surgery: a randomized controlled trial

Comparison of Absorbable Packing versus No Packing in Wound Healing after Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Nasal packing after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) is controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to compare absorbable packing versus no packing in wound healing after ESS for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis.

DATA SOURCE

English electronic databases, including Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed, were searched, and only randomized controlled trials were included.

METHODS

The outcome measures were the presence of synechiae/adhesion formation, mucosal edema, crusting, granulation formation, and infection. The McNemar's test was used for pooled analysis.

RESULTS

Four studies with 148 participants were included. The pooled analysis showed that absorbable packing may offer benefit in reducing adhesion at 6-8 weeks (odds ratio [OR]: 0.3864; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.2136-0.7235) and 12 weeks (OR: 0.2396, 95% CI: 0.08267-0.7709) postoperatively compared with no packing. There was no significant difference between the packed and the unpacked side at 2, 6-8, and 12 weeks after ESS in terms of presence of crusting, edema, and granulation formation.

CONCLUSION

There is insufficient evidence to suggest that absorbable packing after ESS does not increase mucosal edema, granulation formation, and infection. However, the absorbable packing may be more effective than no packing for the prevention of mucosal adhesion after ESS. The use of absorbable nasal packing after ESS is recommended when used to reduce postoperative mucosal adhesion. More research in this area is clearly needed.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: rhinosinusitis 2021

I.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BACKGROUND: The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR-RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR-RS-2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence-based findings of the document.

METHODS

ICAR-RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence-based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence-based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary.

RESULTS

ICAR-RS-2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence-based management algorithm is provided.

CONCLUSION

This ICAR-RS-2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence-based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS.

Article Commentary: Hemostats, Sealants, and Adhesives: A Practical Guide for the Surgeon

Hemostats, sealants, and adhesives are useful adjuncts to modern surgical procedures. To maximize their benefit, a surgeon needs to understand the safety, efficacy, usability, and cost of these agents. To be truly added to a surgeon's own toolbox, the operator must also have knowledge of when and how to best use these materials. This commentary is designed to succinctly facilitate this understanding and knowledge. A nomenclature and classification system based on group, category, and class has been created to help with this process and is provided here. By using this system, materials consisting of similar design and for common indications can be compared. For example, in this system, the three functional groups are hemostats, sealants, and adhesives. The hemostats may be divided into four categories: mechanical, active, flowable, and fibrin sealant. These hemostat categories are further subdivided into generic classes based on the composition of the approved materials. Similarly, categories and classes are provided for sealants and adhesives. In this commentary, the salient points with respect to the characteristics of these agents are presented. A discussion of when these agents can be used in specific indications and how they may be applied to achieve the best results is also provided.

Current and Alternative Therapies for Nasal Mucosa Injury: A Review

Nasal mucosa injury can be caused by trauma, radiotherapy, chronic infection such as sinusitis, and post sinus surgery. The rate of healing and its treatment are important in the recovery of patients especially in post sinus surgery, which introduces new injuries. In this review, the current knowledge in terms of the mechanism underlying nasal wound healing was initially discussed. The currently available treatment options for enhancement of wound healing following sinus surgery were discussed and these had included intravenous antibiotics or steroids, various nasal sprays, and nasal packing. In addition, emerging alternative therapies in nasal mucosa wound healing such as herbal medicine and the advancement of regenerative medicine therapies such as stem cells and their byproducts were also discussed. Despite the various available treatment options for wound healing in nasal mucosa, rigorous strong evidence of their efficacy is gravely warranted in order to recommend them as part of the treatment modality.

Prospective pilot study of Floseal® for the treatment of anterior epistaxis in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT)

BACKGROUND

Epistaxis is the most common symptom of hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT), affecting more than 98% of adults with HHT, with significant impact on quality of life. Floseal® has been shown to be effective for the management of anterior epistaxis, but has yet to be thoroughly evaluated in this population. Our goal was to evaluate the efficacy of Floseal® for managing acute anterior epistaxis in patients with HHT.

METHODS

A pilot prospective clinical trial was conducted at two tertiary referral centres, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada and The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Canada. All patients with HHT presenting with acute anterior epistaxis to the two study centres, who enrolled in the study, received Floseal® treatment. The primary outcome measures were achievement of hemostasis and changes in the Epistaxis Severity Score (ESS) between baseline and one-month follow up. Secondary outcome measure included clinical assessment of the nasal cavity.

RESULTS

Seven patients were included in the final analysis. All patients underwent treatment of anterior epistaxis with Floseal® and achieved control of epistaxis within 15-min post-application. Application of Floseal® was well tolerated, with patients reporting a pain score of 3 ± 3.13 out of 10. There was no statistically significant difference noted in ESS scores pre-treatment and one-month follow up, 6.27 ± 2.42 vs. 4.50 ± 2.44, p = 0.179. There was a significant improvement clinically on exam of the nasal cavity between baseline and at one-month follow up, indicated by a decrease in the clinical assessment score, 17.29 ± 7.70 vs. 9.57 ± 7.81 (p = 0.0088).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HHT presenting with acute epistaxis were able to achieve hemostasis with one application of Floseal®, with the procedure being very well tolerated with minimal pain. Although there was no significant change in ESS scores, clinical assessment of the nasal cavity revealed significant improvement at one-month follow up post treatment with Floseal®.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This multi-centered prospective clinical trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02638012 ). Registered on December 22, 2015.

Topical biomaterials to prevent post-tonsillectomy hemorrhage

Despite advances in surgical technique, postoperative hemorrhage remains a common cause of mortality and morbidity for patients following tonsillectomy. Application of biomaterials at the time of tonsillectomy can potentially accelerate mucosal wound healing and eliminate the risk of post-tonsillectomy hemorrhage (PTH). To understand the current state and identify possible routes for the development of the ideal biomaterials to prevent PTH, topical biomaterials for eliminating the risk of PTH were reviewed. Alternative topical biomaterials that hold the potential to reduce the risk of PTH were also summarized.

Can floseal™ be applied safely during otologic surgery? Assessment of ototoxicity in a chinchilla animal model

Background

In otologic surgery good visualization is paramount, and patients with bleeding diatheses or who need to be anti-coagulated can present a significant challenge. Here, we determine whether Floseal™, a hemostatic matrix, is ototoxic in a validated animal model.

Methods

Nine chinchillas housed in the animal care facilities of the Montreal Children’s Hospital Research Institute were used for the study. After a myringotomy incision was made in each tympanic membrane, baseline auditory brainstem response measurements were performed at 8, 20, and 25 kHz. In each animal one ear was randomized to receive Floseal™ to the middle ear cavity, whereas the other ear served as the control and received 0.9% sodium chloride. Outcome measures included early (day 7) and late (day 30) auditory brainstem response, clinical evidence of facial nerve or vestibular disturbance and histological evidence of ototoxity.

Results

There was no significant hearing threshold shift on auditory brainstem response across all tested frequencies for both experimental and control ear. No animals receiving Floseal™ developed facial or vestibular nerve dysfunction and there was no histological evidence of ototoxicity.

Conclusion

Based on the preliminary ototoxicity assessment on nine chinchillas, transtympanic Floseal™ does not appear to be ototoxic. More studies are warranted to assess the safety and applicability of the product in humans.

Advances in Absorbable Biomaterials and Nasal Packing

Nasal biomaterials have been developed to improve postoperative outcomes after functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). These products have been designed to overcome certain common complications in FESS, and to maximize patient comfort. This article evaluates the performance of nonabsorbable and absorbable packing with respect to these outcomes. The collected trials suggest superior performance of bioabsorbable packs compared with absorbable packs with respect to patient comfort. For hemostasis and wound healing, variation in performance metrics makes interstudy comparison difficult. Before further trials are conducted, consensus must be reached among rhinologists as to the proper method of evaluating these products.

Hemostasis in sinus surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Optimization of the surgical field involves a complex interplay of many factors. Although it is agreed that hemostasis is critical to safe, efficient, and successful sinus surgery, a lack of consensus exists as to the best way to achieve it. This review examines the current body of evidence supporting many of the practices surgeons believe to influence hemostasis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although many of the practices discussed in this article have long been considered to influence hemostasis, it is not until recently that high-level evidence supporting their use has been available. Well designed studies now exist supporting the preoperative use of oral steroids in polyp patients, the importance of adequate reverse trendelenburg positioning, the use of flexible laryngeal mask ventilation during general anesthesia, and the increased safety and comparable efficacy of topical epinephrine over other topical and injectable agents. Controversy still exists as to the ideal method of achieving controlled hypotensive anesthesia, although new evidence has emerged as to what hemodynamic parameters should be adhered to, to reduce the risk of cerebral hypoperfusion.

SUMMARY

Numerous factors influence hemostasis and so it is important that ENT surgeons have a sound understanding of the evidence supporting their everyday surgical practice. Improved standardization of scoring and reporting of bleeding may increase the power of research studies to draw more definitive conclusions about the role that certain factors have on hemostasis.

The use of FloSeal haemostatic sealant in the management of epistaxis: a prospective clinical study and literature review

INTRODUCTION It is standard practice in the UK that if conservative measures or chemical cautery fail to control epistaxis, patients receive nasal packing which is often uncomfortable, requires admission and has well documented associated morbidity. Our study aims to evaluate the use of FloSeal haemostatic sealant in managing patients with epistaxis. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients were identified from those referred with active epistaxis. A successful outcome was defined as complete haemostasis with FloSeal alone, with no further significant bleeding requiring admission or further interventions in the subsequent 7 days. Patients reported satisfaction using a ten-point visual analogue scale. Ear, nose and throat doctors recorded patient demographics, time to prepare FloSeal, length of stay, need for further treatment and adverse events on an electronic database. RESULTS 30 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean time to prepare FloSeal was 5 minutes. The success rate of FloSeal was 90%. The mean length of stay was 2.75 hours. The mean patient satisfaction with FloSeal was 8.4/10. No adverse events occurred. DISCUSSION FloSeal was found to be effective in controlling anterior epistaxis. There was a single case of posterior epistaxis which required operative management. The literature largely supports FloSeal in anterior epistaxis, but indicates sphenopalatine artery ligation as the definitive management of posterior epistaxis. CONCLUSIONS Our data support the use of FloSeal in patients with anterior epistaxis not controlled with conservative measures or chemical cautery. It was found to be easy to use, is well tolerated by patients and is efficient in financial terms.

Biomaterials in Rhinology

Introduction

Many different kinds of rhinologic biomaterials, both nonabsorbable and absorbable, have been developed over the years to improve outcomes following endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. In particular, these products have been designed to prevent postoperative bleeding, optimize the wound healing process, and reduce inflammation. This review evaluates the most recent evidence on biomaterials used in rhinology, focusing on these outcomes after ESS.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov.

Review Methods

A primary literature search based on the listed databases was performed with combinatorial search terms. Studies were considered for review if they met a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Conclusions

Some products have performed better than others in clinical trials, although significant heterogeneity among studies does not allow for selection of a clearly superior biomaterial. While nonabsorbable biomaterials are still effective in achieving certain outcomes, newer, absorbable substances may be just as effective and avoid the morbidity associated with nasal packing removal. Steroid-eluting biomaterials have shown promising early results in reducing inflammation and promoting wound healing.

Implications for Practice

Certain absorbable biomaterials, such as chitosan gel and fibrin glue, have performed well with respect to postoperative hemostasis and wound healing, although they do not address mucosal inflammation. Steroid delivery systems may play an increasingly important role in reducing disease recurrence after ESS, although more studies are needed to assess long-term outcomes.

The utility of FloSeal haemostatic agent in the management of epistaxis

Background:

FloSeal, a locally applied haemostatic agent, has been shown to be effective in a variety of clinical situations. This study investigated its potential benefits in the management of epistaxis.

Methods:

The outcomes of a series of patients with epistaxis presenting to one ENT unit, over a two-month period, were compared. Patients were either treated with FloSeal or traditional epistaxis management techniques. Success of FloSeal was classed as complete haemostasis after its application, without the need for further interventions and no readmission with epistaxis within 7 days.

Results:

Our study comprised 101 adults, with a mean age of 70 years (range, 22–98 years). The overall success rate for FloSeal was 14 per cent (5 out of 36 cases). It was successful in 66 per cent of anterior epistaxis cases (2 out of 3) and in only 9 per cent of posterior epistaxis cases (3 out of 33). There was a significantly higher failure rate of FloSeal compared with nasal packing in posterior epistaxis (p < 0.001).

Conclusion:

Our findings suggest that FloSeal has a limited role in the management of epistaxis.

Use of Floseal®, a human gelatine-thrombin matrix sealant, in surgery: a systematic review

Background

Surgical bleeding can be associated with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality across all surgical areas. Thus, numerous products have been developed to achieve haemostasis. A flowable haemostatic matrix such as Floseal^® can quickly and reliably stop bleeding across the full spectrum of bleeding scenarios. The aim of this study was to systematically review clinical and economic evidence regarding the use of Floseal^® in surgical procedures.

Methods

An extensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library over the period spanning 2003–2013 to identify publications related to Floseal^® use in all types of surgical procedures. Case reports and case series studies were excluded.

Results

A total of 27 papers met the selection criteria and were analysed. In the studies, blood loss and the time to achieve haemostasis were the most reported outcomes used to assess the efficacy of Floseal^®. The majority of published studies (64%) examined the use of Floseal^® compared with conventional methods (such as electrocautery or suturing). The remaining 36% of the studies evaluated the use of Floseal^® compared with other haemostatic agents, such as Surgicel^®, Gelfoam^®, and Hemostase^®. FloSeal^® has been demonstrated to be an efficacious method in surgical procedures to reduce the time to achieve haemostasis, the frequency of intra- and postoperative bleeding, and the length of hospital stay, among other primary outcomes, resulting in less consumption of health resources.

Conclusions

The majority of the selected studies confirmed that Floseal^® showed improvements over other haemostatic agents in achieving haemostasis and reducing blood loss.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2482-14-111) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Oxidised cellulose powder for haemostasis following sinus surgery: a pilot randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Haemorrhage is the most common major complication of endoscopic sinus surgery. Post-operative absorbable or non-absorbable nasal packing can cause pain and blockage. Haemostatic powders or gels may prevent this problem. However, when based on factors in the clotting cascade, they induce an inflammatory reaction and can cause post-operative synechiae. Oxidised cellulose powder produces haemostasis without inducing synechiae formation, but has not been trialled for sinus surgery.

METHOD

A randomised clinical trial was performed to compare cellulose powder to non-absorbable packing following sinus surgery. Participants were 50 consecutive patients undergoing sinus surgery, 47 of whom completed the study. The main outcome measures were post-operative bleeding, pain scores and synechiae formation.

RESULTS

Cellulose powder was effective at stopping bleeding, and was associated with less pain than nasal packing, with no evidence of increased synechiae formation.

CONCLUSION

Cellulose powder appears to be a good haemostatic agent following sinus surgery. A larger trial would allow more accurate quantification of its effectiveness.