Background and Aim: Silver nitrate is well known as an effective topical treatment for epistaxis. It has some disadvantages like the local burn extension and the noxious smell that stimulates lacrimation and sneezing. Alum, on the other hand, has been used in the medical field to control bleeding by different specialties. If alum which does not have silver nitrate disadvantages can control epistaxis more efficiently, it would be a better alternative. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and the outcome of silver nitrate and alum in control of epistaxis.
Methods: This is an experimental animal study on 15 rabbits divided into 3 groups. A similar incision was made in the nose of all rabbits in the 3 groups. In the first group silver nitrate was used to stop bleeding, in the second alum was used and the third was left for spontaneous cessation of bleeding. The mean time needed for cessation of bleeding was measured and compared. One week later, one biopsy from the healed incision was taken from group 1 and another biopsy from group 2 for histopathology.
Results: The bleeding stopped faster in the second group, for which alum was used, in comparison to the other two groups. The histopathological findings in the biopsies taken showed better healing in the wound on which the alum was used.
Conclusions: Alum is a better alternative to silver nitrate in control of epistaxis. It controls bleeding in a shorter time, and also result in better healing characteristics when compared to silver nitrate.
Key words: Aluminum, Epistaxis, Silver nitrate, Therapeutics.
|
