Abstract
Background: Posterior bleeds account for 5% of epistaxis. The patient cohort is often elderly and has significant co-morbidities. Such cases have been managed historically with urinary catheters, held in place with umbilical clips. Recently bespoke, double balloon, posterior packs have been utilised. The treatments remain in clinical equipoise with no gold standard or clear national guideline. Methodology: A ten question survey was sent out through www.surveymonkey.com. Attempts were made to contact all Trusts in the United Kingdom via the ENT on call service. A comparison of treatment costs was made. Results: 112 responses have been received. 54% of respondents reported a preference for bespoke posterior pack insertion, only 12% preferred catheters. Twice as many respondents have seen complications from urinary catheters: 14% vs 29%. The availability of posterior packs is inconsistent: 30% of respondents were not aware of the packs or reported them unavailable in their hospital. Conclusions: This survey provides the first comparison of the techniques in the United Kingdom. Bespoke packs have a lower complication rate and are preferred by ENT clinicians on the front line of patient care. We recommend that all UK trusts should stock posterior packs which should be used as first line treatment for cases of posterior epistaxis.
Highlights
Posterior bleeds account for 5% of epistaxis
The treatments remain in clinical equipoise with no gold standard or clear national guideline
We recommend that all UK trusts should stock posterior packs which should be used as first line treatment for cases of posterior epistaxis
Summary
Posterior bleeds account for 5% of epistaxis. The patient cohort is often elderly and has significant co-morbidities. 54% of respondents reported a preference for bespoke posterior pack insertion, only 12% preferred catheters. Twice as many respondents have seen complications from urinary catheters: 14% vs 29%. We recommend that all UK trusts should stock posterior packs which should be used as first line treatment for cases of posterior epistaxis. ENT UK guidelines currently advise the use of posterior nasal packs or catheters in cases of profuse bleeding in which anterior non-dissolvable nasal packs have been unsuccessful in stemming bleeding.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.