Objective: To study whether negative-pressure septal drainage could be an alternative to packs after septoplasty.
Method: This was a randomized controlled trial. The study involved 60 patients who underwent septoplasty. Patients were randomly divided into two groups, one with anterior nasal packs and the other with negative-pressure septal drainage. Patients were asked to record pain levels using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Postoperative symptoms and complications were compared during 24 h and 48 h postoperative period including pain, drying sensation of mouth, sleep difficulty, conjunctival congestion, haemorrhage. VAS scores and incidence were evaluated during 1 week and 6 weeks postoperative period including pain, bleeding, haematoma, septal perforation, synechiae and septal perforation.
Result: Patients of negative-pressure septal drainage suffered from less pain than patients of nasal packs during the first 24 h and 48 h postoperative period. The results for pain, drying sensation of mouth, sleep difficulty, conjunctival congestion, haemorrhage were different between groups (P < 0.05), especially the amount of bleeding during 48 h postoperatively in patients undergoing negative pressure drainage [(0.52 ± 0.63)ml] was significantly less than the group who received anterior nasal packs [(21.03 ± 5.88) ml] (P < 0.01). On the other hand, haematoma, synechiae and perforation were not statistically different between groups during 1 week and 6 weeks follow-up period (P > 0.05).
Conclusion: Using negative-pressure drainage instead of nasal packs after septoplasty seems a more reasonable option. The negative-pressure drainage technique may be the preferred option to provide higher patient satisfaction and has the same level of postoperative complica.tion to nasal packs as for septoplasty surgery.