A comparison of effectiveness between Posisep and Merocel nasal packing after endoscopic sinus surgery: Findings from a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial.

Abstract

The effectiveness of nonabsorbable and biodegradable nasal packing is still controversial, and the choice of nasal packing type can alter the outcome of endoscopic sinus surgery. This study compared the effectiveness of Posisep and Merocel as nasal packing materials with regard to hemostasis, adhesion, wound healing, patient's satisfaction and health-related quality of life after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). A prospective, randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial was conducted in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis refractory undergoing symmetrical bilateral ESS. At the completion of surgery, a nasal packing (either Merocel or Posisep) was randomly chosen and placed into the middle meatus of each nasal cavity. All patients were scheduled for follow-up visits at 24 hours, 5 days, 3 weeks, and 5 weeks days after surgery. Health-related quality of life was measured using the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22). The overall inflammatory burden of chronic rhinosinusitis was measured by the Lund-Mackay postoperative endoscopic score (LMES). Among 62 patients included in data analysis (n = 31 for each group), the mean age was 42.4 years and 54.8% were females. Patients with Posisep after ESS had more improvement and better symptoms measured through SNOT-22 and LMES at 24 hours, 5 days, and 3 weeks than those with Merocel after ESS. While some aspects measured by LMES such as discharge and scarring were still better until 5 weeks after surgery, all symptoms measured by SNOT-22 were similar between the 2 groups 5 weeks after surgery. Posisep containing chitosan provided patients with a better quality of life throughout the early recovery period compared with Merocel. Although more studies are needed, our findings support the use of Posisep after ESS.