… This economic evaluation compared the cost-effectiveness of TESPAL vs endovascular
arterial embolization for the treatment of intractable epistaxis. A decision tree analysis with a time …

… the cost effectiveness and outcomes of commonly used methods for treating epistaxis in the
… first-line therapy for intractable epistaxis, surgical ligation is less costly than nasal packing. …

… on cost-effectiveness may help clinicians to make a decision when managing intractable
epistaxis… model confirm that TESPAL is more cost-effective for patients with intractable epistaxis. …

… Combining risk and cost-effectiveness perspectives, we recommend a laddered approach
to intractable epistaxis with TESPAL first, followed by either embolization or posterior packing. …

… intractable posterior epistaxis remains controversial. We retrospectively reviewed the charts
of 21 patients treated for intractable epistaxis … rates, complications, and cost. Twelve patients …

… Epistaxis is the most common otolaryngology emergency and … with intractable spontaneous
epistaxis who continue to bleed and require more aggressive therapy. Intractable epistaxis is …

… Epistaxis is a common problem treated by otolaryngologists, with up to 60% of the general
… cases of epistaxis are treated in the outpatient setting, complicated or intractable cases often …

… vs posterior epistaxis in the literature, all cases described as “anterior” in our patients’
records had epistaxis location anterior to the middle turbinate. Epistaxis treatment modalities …

… Only 6% of patients with epistaxis will require medical assistance, and cases of severe
intractable epistaxis are rare 6 . Anterior nasal packing, the most common therapy for epistaxis, …

… Patients undergoing either of these interventions are likely to have more severe or
intractable epistaxis compared with patients undergoing nasal packing alone. Further data are …