Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of surface properties of Merocel® (polyvinyl acetal) and silicone nasal splints on biofilm formation

  • Rhinology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of the study was to investigate biofilm formation on Merocel® and silicone nasal splint after nasal septal surgery. 50 patients who were scheduled to undergo nasal septal surgery were included in this study. The patients were randomized into receiving an insert of Merocel® or silicone splint after septoplasty. In group 1 (8 females, 17 males) and group 2 (10 females, 15 males), Merocel® packs or silicone splints were inserted into nasal cavities at the end of the procedures, respectively. All packs were removed 48 h after insertion, and samples were taken from the packs under sterilized conditions. Scanning electron microscopy was performed to observe biofilm formation on the surfaces of Merocel® and silicone splints. Biofilm formation was observed in 25 (100 %) and 3 (12 %) of the Merocel® and silicone splint samples, respectively. Our study revealed that biofilm formation on Merocel® packs is significantly higher than silicone splints, mainly due to the different texture and surface properties of these materials. Considering the hazardous effects of biofilm formation on humans, our observations in this study may guide surgeons to choose the most appropriate packing material after nasal septal surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Özkiris M, Kapusuz Z, Öztürk S, Bolat E, Saydam L (2013) The effects of sevoflurane and isoflurane in nasal septal surgery. J Craniofac Surg 24(2):592–595

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hajiioannou JK, Bizaki A, Fragiadakis G, Bourolias C, Spanakis I, Chlouverakis G et al (2007) Optimal time for nasal packing removal after septoplasty. A comparative study. Rhinology 45(1):68–71

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Caniello M, Passerotti GH, Goto EY, Voegels RL, Butugan O (2005) Antibiotics in septoplasty: is it necessary? Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 71(6):734–738

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee IN, Vukovic L (1988) Hemostatic suture for septoplasty: how we do it. J Otolaryngol 17(1):54–56

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. von Schoenberg M, Robinson P, Ryan R (1993) Nasal packing after routine nasal surgery—is it justified? J Laryngol Otol 107(10):902–905

    Google Scholar 

  6. Yilmaz MS, Guven M, Elicora SS, Kaymaz R (2013) An evaluation of biodegradable synthetic polyurethane foam in patients following septoplasty: a prospective randomized trial. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 148(1):140–144

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kim YS, Kim YH, Kim NH, Kim SH, Kim KR, Kim KS (2011) A prospective, randomized, single-blinded controlled trial on biodegradable synthetic polyurethane foam as a packing material after septoplasty. Am J Rhinol Allergy 25(2):e77–e79

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Prabhu V, Kaushik V, Rhodes S, Tay H (2007) Foam nasal packs: a prospective, randomised, patient-controlled study. Rhinology 45(3):242–247

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Stoodley P, Sauer K, Davies DG, Costerton JW (2002) Biofilms as complex differentiated communities. Annu Rev Microbiol 56:187–209

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Soto SM (2013) Role of efflux pumps in the antibiotic resistance of bacteria embedded in a biofilm. Virulence 4(3):223–229

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chole RA, Faddis BT (2002) Evidence for microbial biofilms in cholesteatomas. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 128(10):1129–1133

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mäkitie A, Aaltonen LM, Hytönen M, Malmberg H (2000) Postoperative infection following nasal septoplasty. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 543:165–166

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rechtweg JS, Paolini RV, Belmont MJ, Wax MK (2001) Postoperative antibiotic use of septoplasty: a survey of practice habits of the membership of the American Rhinologic Society. Am J Rhinol 15(5):315–320

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Stewart PS, Costerton JW (2000) Antibiotic resistance of bacteria in biofilms. Lancet 358:135–138

    Google Scholar 

  15. Schmidlin PR, Müller P, Attin T, Wieland M, Hofer D, Guggenheim B (2013) Polyspecies biofilm formation on implant surfaces with different surface characteristics. J Appl Oral Sci 21(1):48–55

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Campbell JB, Watson MG, Shenoi PM (1987) The role of intranasal splints in the prevention of post-operative nasal adhesions. Laryngol Otol 101(11):1140–1143

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Asaka D, Yoshikawa M, Okushi T, Nakayama T, Matsuwaki Y, Otori N, Moriyama H (2011) Nasal splinting using silicone plates without gauze packing following septoplasty combined with inferior turbinate surgery. Auris Nasus Larynx 39(1):53–58

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Joshi RR, Nepal A, Chhetri ST, Bhandary S, Panta TB, Regmi D (2012) An evaluation of Merocel and Neosporin impregnated ribbon gauze packs in patients following nasal surgery: a prospective randomised trial. Health Renaissance 10:30–34

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a grant from our university (Project No. 201341D04). The authors take responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper. The authors declare that there is no competing interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Electron Microscopy Center, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey

    Ilknur Dag

  2. ENT Department, Yunus Emre State Hospital, Eskisehir, Turkey

    Mustafa Acar

  3. ENT Department, Elazıg Education and Research Hospital, Elazıg, Turkey

    Oner Sakallioglu

  4. ENT Department, Bozyaka Teaching and Research Hospital, Karabağlar, 35170, Izmir, Turkey

    Tolgahan Catli

  5. ENT Department, Medical Faculty, Medeniyet University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Turhan San

  6. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical Faculty, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey

    Cemal Cingi

Authors
  1. Ilknur Dag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mustafa Acar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Oner Sakallioglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tolgahan Catli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Turhan San
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Cemal Cingi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tolgahan Catli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dag, I., Acar, M., Sakallioglu, O. et al. Influence of surface properties of Merocel® (polyvinyl acetal) and silicone nasal splints on biofilm formation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 271, 1519–1524 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-013-2721-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-013-2721-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation