A double-blind randomised controlled trial of gloved versus ungloved merocel middle meatal spacers for endoscopic sinus surgery.

BACKGROUND Middle meatal spacers are commonly used following endoscopic sinus surgery to prevent post-operative bleeding and lateralization of the middle turbinates. The effects of nasal packing on post-operative sinonasal mucosal healing remain unknown in humans. OBJECTIVE This study aims to compare the histopathalogical effects of Merocel and Merocel covered with a finger glove on mucosal healing, and patients` discomfort immediately post-operatively after endoscopic sinus surgery and at removal of the nasal packing. METHODS Thirty-seven patients with chronic rhinosinusitis undergoing bilateral endoscopic sinus surgery were enrolled in a prospective study. Patients were randomized and blinded to receive Merocel middle meatal spacer (MMMS) in one nostril and finger glove Merocel middle meatal spacer (FGMMS) in the contra lateral side. Patients were seen on post-operative day 6, and completed a visual analogue score reporting the post-operative discomfort from nasal packing on each side. Following the removal of nasal packing, patients indicated which side caused more discomfort on removal. Biopsies were taken from the middle turbinates and sent to a blinded pathologist who scored the level of mucosal inflammation from 0 - 4. RESULTS There was no statistically significant difference between MMMS and FGMMS in regards to their effect on sinonasal mucosal inflammation and discomfort post-operatively. A statistically significant difference was noted with respect to discomfort at removal with the uncovered Merocel more likely to cause discomfort when compared to the Merocel covered in a glove finger. CONCLUSION MMMS and FGMMS are equivalent in the amount of sinonasal mucosal inflammation and discomfort post endoscopic sinus surgery. However, the main advantage of the FGMMS was a significant reduction in pain on removal when compared with the MMMS.