Mobilisation of epistaxis patients - a prospective, randomised study documenting a safe patient care regime

Current Approaches to Epistaxis Treatment in Primary and Secondary Care

BACKGROUND

The lifetime prevalence of epistaxis is approximately 60%, and 6-10% of the affected persons need medical care. In rare cases, severe bleeding calls for the rapid initiation of effective treatment.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent articles that were retrieved by a selective search PubMed, and on the authors' clinical experience.

RESULTS

There are no German guidelines for the management of epistaxis. The available evidence consists mainly of retro spective analyses and expert opinions. 65-75% of the patients who require treatment can be adequately cared for by their primary care physician or by an emergency physician with baseline measures. If there is persistent anterior epistaxis, an otorhinolaryngologist can control the bleeding sastisfactorily in 78-88% of cases with chemical or electrical cauterization. Nasal packing is used if this treatment fails, or for posterior epistaxis. In a retrospective study, surgical treatment was found to be more effective than nasal packing in the treatment of posterior epistaxis (97% versus 62% treatment success). Percutaneous embolization is an alternative treatment for patients whom general anesthesia would put at high risk.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of severe or recurrent epistaxis requires the interdisciplinary collaboration of the primary care physician, the emergency physician, the practice-based otolaryngologist, and the hospital otolaryngology service. Uniform guidelines and epidemiological studies on this topic would be desirable.

Initial assessment in the management of adult epistaxis: systematic review

Background:

The initial assessment of epistaxis patients commonly includes: first aid measures, observations, focused history taking, and clinical examinations and investigations. This systematic review aimed to identify evidence that informs how the initial assessment of these patients should be conducted.

Method:

A systematic review of the literature was performed using a standardised methodology and search strategy.

Results:

Seventeen articles were included. Factors identified were: co-morbidity, intrinsic patient factors, coagulation screening and ice pack use. Hypertension and anticoagulant use were demonstrated to adversely affect outcomes. Coagulation screening is useful in patients on anticoagulant medication. Four studies could not be accessed. Retrospective methodology and insufficient statistical analysis limit several studies.

Conclusion:

Sustained ambulatory hypertension, anticoagulant therapy and posterior bleeding may be associated with recurrent epistaxis, and should be recorded. Oral ice pack use may decrease severity and can be considered as first aid. Coagulation studies are appropriate for patients with a history of anticoagulant use or bleeding diatheses.