Grave complicação do tratamento de epistaxe: relato de caso Severe complication in the treatment of epistaxis: a case report

Epistaxe é uma afecção muito comum, sendo geralmente autolimitada ou tratada com medidas mais conservadoras como compressão local, compressas frias, controle da pressão arterial, cauterização sob anestesia local (química ou termo-elétrica) ou tamponamento nasal anterior. Contudo, podem se apresentar como quadros graves e de difícil tratamento, sendo necessárias medidas mais agressivas como tamponamento nasal antero-posterior, ligadura arterial cirúrgica ou embolização. Apresentamos o caso de um paciente de 49 anos de idade que cursou com epistaxe de difícil controle e evoluiu com uma grave complicação relacionada ao tratamento realizado em outro serviço.<br>Epistaxis is a very usual disorder, it is usually self-restricted or controlled with conservative measures as local compression, cold gauze, arterial pressure control, cauterization under local anesthesia (chemical or thermoelectric) or anterior nasal packing. However, it could be presented as severe cases, and more aggressive measures could be necessary, like posterior nasal packing, arterial ligation or embolization. We present one case of a forty-nine-year-old patient with epistaxis who developed a severe treatment complication from another department

Assessing the correlations between subjective symptom scores and turbinoseptal relationships in pretreatment adults with chronic rhinosinusitis

Abstract Background This study was undertaken to assess the correlations between subjective symptom score in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis and endoscopic turbinoseptal relationship (TSR). Aim To assess the pattern of TSR and their correlations with symptom score in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Settings and design This was an observational study in a tertiary/teaching hospital setting Patients and Methods Consecutive pretreatment adults with chronic rhinosinusitis completed the sinonasal outcome test 22 (SNOT22) and had nasal endoscopy. At endoscopy, the TSR was determined, as well as the presence of nasal polyps. Statistical analysis Mean SNOT22 score was calculated and TSR types were grouped and their distribution documented with types 3 and 4 taken as unfavorable types. χ2-Tests were used to determine the correlations between turbinoseptal types, presence of nasal polys, and SNOT22 scores with the level of significance set at P value up to 0.05. Results A total of 53 [23 (43.4%) men and 30 (56.6%) women] patients with a mean age of 42.5±18.6, completed the study. Median symptom duration was 36 weeks (13–112 weeks). Mean SNOT22 score was 29.7±2.8. Unfavorable TSR types were found in 42.5% of nostrils, more on the right (χ2=13.2; P≤0.01). There is no significant correlation between the presence of unfavorable TSR and worsening total SNOT22 scores [R (K-S=0.13 P=0.95) L (K-S=0.34, P=0.07)]. Conclusion Unfavorable TSR is common in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. However, there is no correlation between the presence of abnormal TSR and symptom scores

Salivary stones and stenosis. A comprehensive classification

INTRODUCTION: Sialendoscopy and sialoMRI enables diagnosis of salivary gland obstructive pathologies, such as lithiasis, stenosis, and dilatations. Therefore, a classification of these pathologies is needed, allowing large series comparisons, for better diagnosis and treatment of salivary pathologies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: With help from people from the European Sialendoscopy Training Center (ESTC), the results of sialographies, sialoMRI and sialendoscopies, a comprehensive classification of obstructive salivary pathologies is described, based on the absence or presence of lithiasis (L), stenosis (S), and dilatation (D) ("LSD" classification). DISCUSSION: It appears that a classification of salivary gland obstructive pathologies should be described. We hope it will be widely used and of course criticized to be improved and to compare the results of salivary gland diagnostic methods, such as sialography and sialendoscopy, and also the results and indications for salivary gland therapeutic methods, such as lithotripsy, sialendoscopy, and/or open surgery

Discomfort and costs in epistaxis treatment

Epistaxis is a very common ENT event. Apart from the effectiveness of the different treatment options, the discomfort and the financial burden are of great importance. It has been the aim of this study to obtain data regarding the discomfort/pain of the epistaxis treatments and to calculate the financial burden. During the period between April 2010 and July 2011 epistaxis patients at our hospital had the opportunity to rate the discomfort/pain they experienced during their treatment on a 0-10 VAS scale. The costs of epistaxis treatments were calculated in an extended cohort. 84 VAS scores in 61 patients were acquired and the costs of treatment were calculated in 96 patients. The lowest VAS scores were found in chemical and electric coagulation with 1.5 and 2.0, respectively, followed by surgery (3.0), Rapid Rhino(®) packing (6.0) and balloon pack (7.5). The costs of treatments depended on whether the treatment was in an out- or inpatient setting. Surgery was not significantly more expensive than packing methods in the inpatient setting. Anterior epistaxis could be managed by local coagulation with an acceptable impact/cost ratio. At our institution, surgery was the most cost effective and the least troublesome procedure in posterior bleedings, preceded by Rapid Rhino(®) packing if required