CAJ | 학술논문

背景：瑞纳凝胶和膨胀海绵是两种常用的鼻腔填塞材料，但目前尚缺乏对两种材料具体填塞效果的全面分析。 　　目的：对比鼻出血和鼻腔术后填塞瑞纳凝胶和膨胀海绵的临床效果及不良反应发生情况。 　　方法：利用计算机检索中国生物医学文献数据库和 PubMed数据库、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆等，检索词为“瑞纳凝胶，随机对照，膨胀海绵；Rena gel, randomized, expansive sponge”，纳入瑞纳凝胶与膨胀海绵填塞的随机对照试验，对填塞和移除时的疼痛感、胀痛感、出血情况、出血控制情况及难易程度进行Meta分析。 　　结果与结论：共纳入4个随机对照试验，包含115例患者。膨胀海绵组填塞与移除时的疼痛感均高于瑞纳凝胶组(P <0.05)；两组填塞6 h的疼痛感无差异(P>0.05)。膨胀海绵组填塞1，6 h的胀痛感显著高于瑞纳凝胶组(P<0.05)。两组填塞时的出血情况无差异(P>0.05)；膨胀海绵组移除时的出血情况重于瑞纳凝胶组(P<0.05)。两种填塞材料的出血控制情况无差异(P>0.05)。膨胀海绵组的填塞和移除难度均大于瑞纳凝胶组(P<0.05)。表明在使用时引发的疼痛、肿痛及填塞和移除时导致的出血方面，瑞纳凝胶较膨胀海绵相对较轻，但在出血控制方面两种材料效果基本相同。
배경：서납응효화팽창해면시량충상용적비강전새재료，단목전상결핍대량충재료구체전새효과적전면분석。 　　목적：대비비출혈화비강술후전새서납응효화팽창해면적림상효과급불량반응발생정황。 　　방법：이용계산궤검색중국생물의학문헌수거고화 PubMed수거고、EMBASE、Cochrane도서관등，검색사위“서납응효，수궤대조，팽창해면；Rena gel, randomized, expansive sponge”，납입서납응효여팽창해면전새적수궤대조시험，대전새화이제시적동통감、창통감、출혈정황、출혈공제정황급난역정도진행Meta분석。 　　결과여결론：공납입4개수궤대조시험，포함115례환자。팽창해면조전새여이제시적동통감균고우서납응효조(P <0.05)；량조전새6 h적동통감무차이(P>0.05)。팽창해면조전새1，6 h적창통감현저고우서납응효조(P<0.05)。량조전새시적출혈정황무차이(P>0.05)；팽창해면조이제시적출혈정황중우서납응효조(P<0.05)。량충전새재료적출혈공제정황무차이(P>0.05)。팽창해면조적전새화이제난도균대우서납응효조(P<0.05)。표명재사용시인발적동통、종통급전새화이제시도치적출혈방면，서납응효교팽창해면상대교경，단재출혈공제방면량충재료효과기본상동。
BACKGROUND:Rena gel and expansive sponge are two kinds of nasal packing materials, but there is stil a lack of comprehensive analysis on their filing effects. OBJECTIVE:To compare the therapeutic efficacy of Rena gel and expansive sponge on nasal hemorrhage and postoperative nasal packing as wel as adverse reactions. METHODS: A computer-based search of CBM, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library was performed for articles addressing randomized controled trials of Rena gel and expansive sponge as filing materials. The keywords were “Rena gel, randomized controled, expansive sponge” in Chinese and English, respectively. Then, aching feeling during filing and removal, sweling pain, bleeding, and bleeding control were compared and analyzed through a Meta-analysis. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:There were four randomized controled trials, involving 115 patients. The severity of pain was higher in the expansive sponge group than the Rena gel group when the filing materials were placed or removed (P < 0.05). However, there was no difference in the severity of pain between the two groups at 6 hours of filing (P > 0.05). The severity of sweling pain was higher in the expansive sponge group than the Rena gel group at 1 and 6 hours after filing (P < 0.05). When the filing materials were removed, the expansive group showed more severe bleeding than the Rena gel group (P < 0.05). No differences in the bleeding when filing and bleeding control were found between the two groups (P> 0.05). In addition, it was more difficult to fil or remove the expansive sponge from the nasal cavity (P < 0.05). These findings indicate that the Rena gel is superior to the expansive sponge in terms of pain, sweling pain, and bleeding when filing or removing the materials. But there is no difference in bleeding control between the two kinds of filing materials.