There are two different models of the widely used Rapid Rhino™ filling available at our department; the 7.5 cm, single-lumen, and the 9 cm, a double-lumen variant with two separately inflatable balloons. Identifying whether one packing is superior to the other will help choose the best possible treatment.
This study aimed to determine whether the new, double-lumen model had advantages compared to its shorter counterpart.
All patients treated with Rapid Rhino™ packings for spontaneous epistaxis were analyzed for various parameters such as recurrence rates, hospitalization rate, and in-patient stay duration. The groups were divided by model and whether patients were treated before or after introducing the double-lumen version.
A total of 865 cases of patients treated with Rapid Rhino™ packs were analyzed. The duration of the in-patient stays decreased from 3.7 to 3.1 days. There was no difference in recurrence rates.
The study concluded that the introduction of the double-lumen, 9 cm Rapid Rhino™ packing has led to a decrease in in-patient time and fewer hospitalizations. Therefore, it should be preferred to the shorter, single-lumen model in the treatment of posterior epistaxis.
Reference:https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1945892419864799
