Safety of (rhino)septoplasty without nasal packing in routine ENT practice.

PURPOSE: This retrospective study assesses the risks and benefits linked to the non-use of nasal packing after a (rhino)septoplasty, compared with post-operative care with anterior nasal packing such as Merocel®. METHODS: Complication rates observed during the first week after surgery were compared between groups with and without use of classic nasal packing over a large sample of 534 patients, who had undergone either a closed or open procedure, with bilateral turbinoplasty, and with or without osteotomies. Complications listed include epistaxis, haematoma, impetiginization, septal perforation, hyperalgesia, and dyspnoea. RESULTS: No significant difference was observed between the group with and without packing regarding the immediate post-operative complications of epistaxis (4.4% of the cases with nasal packing versus 3% without, p = 0.918) and impetiginization (3% of the cases with nasal packing versus 4.2% without, p = 0.478). The technique used, as well as any osteotomies performed, had no impact on the results. CONCLUSION: Non-use of nasal packing after a (rhino)septoplasty is a safe alternative to classic post-operative methods. Provided that there is a rigorous surgical technique and strict clinical control, it should be used as a principal technique in any routine practice due to its safety for patients immediately post-surgery.

Prevalence of lymph nodes in the apex of level V: a plea against the necessity to dissect the apex of level V in mucosal head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the prevalence of histologically proven normal or invaded lymph nodes in the apex of level V. METHODS: Seventy neck dissections were performed in 41 patients with mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Fifty-one neck dissections were performed in 30 previously untreated patients (group 1); 19 neck dissections were carried out in 11 patients previously irradiated (group 2). RESULTS: Pathologic analysis was unable to identify any lymph node in 70% of the apex specimens. In group 1, no lymph nodes were detected in 63%, whereas one or more noninvaded lymph nodes were present in 37%; in group 2, no lymph nodes were identified in 89%, whereas one or more normal lymph nodes were found in 11% (p = .03). Metastatic lymph nodes were never identified. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of lymph nodes in the apex was 30%. No invaded lymph nodes were identified. In addition to anatomic evidence, these results suggest that dissection of the apex is not necessary in mucosal head and neck SCC.