Search

Introduction: Epistaxis is the most common otorhinolaryngological emergency and historically there have been an important debate whether there is a cause-effect relationship with high blood pressure., Aim: This retrospective study explored whether hypertension is a significant risk factor for epistaxis in Emergency Department (ED) patients and examined associations between blood pressure levels and epistaxis episodes., Materials and Methods: Two groups were studied: Group A (patients with epistaxis) and Group B (control). Patient characteristics, comorbidities, and medication use were recorded. Blood pressure measurements were taken upon ED arrival and after specialist evaluation. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, T-test, χ2 test, and logistic regression., Results: Group A, enrolled from April 2014 to February 2015, included 102 patients, mean age 67, male-female ratio 2:1. Blood pressure on arrival was over 140/90 mmHg in 73%, decreasing to 26% after 30 minutes. Group B, enrolled from May 2023 to August 2023, included 126 patients, mean age 59, male-female ratio 2:1. Blood pressure on arrival was over 140/90 mmHg in 60%, decreasing to 23% after 30 minutes. Both groups showed reduced blood pressure post-evaluation. Logistic regression identified anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet therapy as the main independent risk factor for epistaxis. Age, sex, blood pressure levels, and hypertension did not significantly influence epistaxis occurrence., Conclusion: No significant correlation between hypertension and epistaxis was found. Anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet therapy was the primary independent risk factor, highlighting the importance of considering medication history in evaluating epistaxis., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: This study aimed to determine which comorbidities were associated with intractable epistaxis requiring electrocauterization or embolization, and to identify the location where intractable epistaxis frequently occurred., Methods: The patients were divided into two groups: patients with epistaxis successfully controlled in outpatient department (OPD) and those with intractable epistaxis in OPD which was controlled by surgical exploration or arterial embolization (OP/EM). Evaluations of the bleeding locations, related vessels, and patient's comorbidities were conducted., Results: A total of 41 patients from the OP/EM group and 725 patients from the OPD group were enrolled. The following comorbidities showed elevated risks of the intractable epistaxis (p< 0.05) in multivariate analysis; hypertension (OR 1.089, 95% CI 1.049 - 1.132), dyslipidemia (1.132, 1.041 - 1.232), liver cirrhosis (1.272, 1.152 - 1.406), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (1.234, 1.078 - 1.412) and asthma (1.205, 1.053 - 1.379). Inferior and middle turbinate were equally the most common location of the intractable bleeding., Conclusion: In patients with epistaxis requiring hemostatic treatments, comorbidities such as hypertension, dyslipidemia, liver diseases, COPD, and asthma were associated with intractable epistaxis. The main bleeding sites of intractable epistaxis were the middle and inferior turbinate., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest All of authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objective: There is anecdotal evidence SARS-CoV-2 (COVID) RT-PCR screening nasal swabs confer an elevated epistaxis risk. We aimed to assess the association between epistaxis and exposure to a COVID nasal swab., Study Design: A matched pairs design was used., Setting: The study was performed in a single, integrated health care system., Methods: All patients who received a single COVID nasal swab at our institution between April 2020 and March 2021 were included. McNemar's test was used to compare rates of epistaxis between the 7 days following the index COVID swab (hazard period), and the 7 days preceding the index COVID swab (control period). Conditional logistic regression was used to evaluate sociodemographic and clinical risk factors for epistaxis., Results: A total of 827,987 participants were included, with 1047 epistaxis encounters. The prevalence of epistaxis during the hazard and control periods were 0.08% and 0.04%, respectively. Swab exposure was associated with 1.92-fold odds of epistaxis during the hazard period (95% confidence interval [1.73, 2.12]). Older age, Asian/Pacific Islander (PI) (compared to white), male sex, hypertension, prior facial trauma, and warfarin or direct-acting oral anticoagulant use were also associated with significantly increased odds of epistaxis (p ≦ 0.01)., Conclusion: COVID nasal swabs are associated with increased odds of epistaxis. Physicians should counsel patients, particularly those at the highest risk, including a history of prior facial trauma, anticoagulants/antiplatelets, or hypertension., (© 2023 American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation.)

Background: Epistaxis after endoscopic endonasal skull base surgeries does not typically occur as an accidental circumstance but often results from multiple factors. We aimed to assess the possible risk factors associated with postoperative epistaxis., Methods: Patients who underwent endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery at Huashan hospital from August 2018 to November 2019 were enrolled in the study. Postoperative epistaxis was defined as severe, persistent, or recurrent arterial nosebleed, which required therapeutic intervention. Patients were divided into the epistaxis and no epistaxis groups. The incidence, clinical characteristics, management, and intraoperative findings were recorded., Results: A total of 762 patients were included in the study. 20 (2.6%) patients experienced postoperative epistaxis, which happened in a delayed fashion between 6 and 30 postoperative days. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that arterial hypertension (OR=3.394, 95%CI: 1.094-10.531, P = 0.034) and preoperative systolic blood pressure (SBP) (OR=1.035, 95%CI: 1.002-1.068) were identified as predictors for postoperative epistaxis. The bleeding sites were identified at the left posterior septal artery (PSA) in 10 (62.5%) cases, the right PSA in 4 (25%) cases, the left palatovaginal artery in 1 (6.25%) case, and the right inferior turbinate branch of the posterior lateral nasal artery in 1 (6.25%) case, respectively. Direct bipolar cauterization was used to stop the bleeding. After definitive treatment, no patients had recurrent epistaxis., Conclusions: Arterial hypertension and preoperative SBP were associated with postoperative epistaxis after endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery, and the left PSA contributed to the dominant site of bleeding during surgical re-exploration., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objective: We aimed to investigate whether high blood pressure and hypertension are associated with epistaxis., Methods: A retrospective study with a propensity score matching analysis was performed at the emergency departments (EDs) of a tertiary university hospital. The mean blood pressure (BP, systolic and diastolic) and proportion of subjects with elevated BP (systolic >120 and/or diastolic >80 mmHg) at presentation were compared between the epistaxis group and matched control group. The proportion of patients with newly diagnosed hypertension within six months between the two groups was also compared., Results: A total of 1353 patients with epistaxis and the same number of those with simple lacerations were matched. The mean systolic and diastolic BPs of the epistaxis group were significantly higher than those of the matched control group (157.1 ± 26.4 and 91.4 ± 17.0 mmHg versus 144.9 ± 32.4 and 84.2 ± 13.5 mmHg) (P < 0.001). The proportion of patients with elevated BP at presentation was also significantly higher in the epistaxis group (91.4%) than in the matched control group (86.2%) (P < 0.001). Of the 724 (53.5%) patients without pre-existing hypertension in the epistaxis group, 660 patients were followed, of whom 107 (16.2%) were newly diagnosed with hypertension within 6 months, which was a significantly higher percentage than among the matched controls (4.9%, P < 0.001) CONCLUSION: The patients with epistaxis had elevated BP at presentation and a higher proportion of newly diagnosed hypertension within six months compared to the matched controls., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Hypertension has long been thought to influence the risk and severity of epistaxis. However, evaluation of the relevant literature reveals articles with methodologic concerns or limited quality. In many instances, these studies are not adequately controlled, and lack of multivariate analyses calls into question any noted association between epistaxis and hypertension. The goal of this commentary is to explain why there is limited guidance about the management of hypertension and the possible association with nosebleed in the 2020 American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation clinical practice guideline for nosebleeds. Background on the literature that describes the association between hypertension and nosebleeds is provided.

Background: Clinical variables including hypertension could be linked with major bleeding events and death beyond vitamin K antagonist (warfarin) or direct oral anti-coagulants (DOACs) treatment strategy., Methods: Subgroup analysis of major bleeding (primary endpoint) associated with clinical variables, site of bleeding, ongoing antithrombotics, reversal treatment or blood transfusion, outcomes (secondary endpoints) was performed in patients with bleeding events submitted to hard 5:1 propensity-score matching for hypertension., Results: Enrolled patients were 2,792 (mean age, 65.6 ± 19.9 years) during 2-year survey including 166,000 visits, of 200,000 inhabitants catchment area; 8,239 patients received warfarin and 3,797 DOACs. Hypertension account for 1,077 (39%) patients; major bleeding for 474 (17%); death for 29 (1%), and 72 (3%) on 1-month and 1-year, respectively. Hypertension, age, glucose, cancer, ischemic vascular disease, and CHA2D2VASc score were more likely to link with major bleeding. On multivariate analysis, only age (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; P < 0.001), CHA2DS2VASc score ≥ 2 (OR, 2.14; P = 0.001), and glucose (OR, 1.01; P = 0.005) were predictors of major bleeding. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated patients with hypertension as compared with patients without showed 60% versus 20% death on 1-month (P < 0.001). Warfarin compared with DOACs was more likely to present with major bleeding (0.7% versus 0.2%; OR, 2.8; P = 0.005). Receiver operator characteristics analysis showed high value (0.61) of age and glucose over creatinine and systolic arterial pressure (P = NS)., Conclusions: Four in 10 patients with major bleeding showed hypertension; of these 8 in 10 will die within 1 month. Warfarin compared with DOACs was more likely to present with major bleeding.

Background: The relationship between hypertension and epistaxis is controversial and poorly understood. The present research investigated atherosclerosis as a potential risk factor in hypertensive patients with epistaxis., Methods: A prospective study of 141 hypertensive patients with epistaxis was conducted. The laboratory tests included full blood count, lipid profile and coagulation profile. All patients underwent funduscopic examination of the eye and were classified in terms of four retinopathy grades., Results: There were strong positive correlations between the number of nosebleeds and retinopathy grade and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level. There were weak correlations between the number of nosebleeds and blood pressure readings and triglycerides levels. Patients with grade III retinopathy, suggesting atherosclerosis, suffered from more frequent nosebleeds than other patients., Conclusion: Atherosclerosis is one of the potential risk factors in hypertensive patients with epistaxis. This may have an impact on treatment choices.

Both epistaxis and hypertension are frequent problems in the adult population. The relationship between the level of arterial pressure and incidence of epistaxis in a patient with hypertension is a question that appears frequently in the clinical practice. A systematic review of the literature regarding the relation of arterial hypertension with epistaxis was performed through MEDLINE and EMBASE. All studies, whether examining the correlation of arterial pressure at presentation of a patient with nasal bleeding or the repercussion of episodes of epistaxis in hypertensive patients, were included in this review. Studies were evaluated independently by two reviewers according to a standard evaluation form. Overall, nine studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Five of them were single-group (patient) studies, while the remaining four included a control group. In eight studies, the patient group included patients with epistaxis, while one focused on hypertensive patients. Six out of nine studies agree that arterial pressure is higher at the time of epistaxis, as compared to the control group or to the general population. Seven out of nine studies conclude that there is cross-correlation between arterial pressure and the actual incident of epistaxis. The presence of high arterial blood pressure during the actual episode of nasal bleeding cannot establish a causative relationship with epistaxis, because of confounding stress and possible white coat phenomenon, but may lead to initial diagnosis of an already installed arterial hypertension.

The aim of the study was to evaluate the role of hypertension in patients hospitalized for serious spontaneous epistaxis. This 6-year retrospective study was based on 219 patients hospitalized in a University Hospital ENT and Head and Neck surgery department for serious spontaneous epistaxis. The following parameters were recorded: length of hospital stay, history of hypertension, blood pressure (BP) recordings (on admission, during hospitalization and on discharge), epistaxis severity criteria, including medical and/or surgical management of epistaxis (blood transfusion depending on blood count, embolization, surgery), medications affecting clotting. Epistaxis was classified into two groups: serious and severe. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of age, sex ratio, history of epistaxis and BP characteristics including history of hypertension, mean BP on admission, mean arterial pressure on discharge and number of patients in whom BP was difficult to control. Patients with more severe epistaxis had a similar exposure to anticoagulant and platelet antiaggregant medications as patients with less severe epistaxis. Overall, on univariate logistic regression analysis, no factors were independently associated with severity of epistaxis. The pathophysiology of serious spontaneous epistaxis remains to be unclear. It concerns elderly patients (>60-70 years old) with a history of hypertension in about 50% of cases. Serious spontaneous epistaxis may also be the presenting sign of underlying true hypertension in about 43% of patients with no history of hypertension. However, hypertension per se does not appear to be a statistically significant causal factor and/or a factor of severity of serious spontaneous epistaxis.

Background: Both epistaxis and hypertension are common in the general population., Objective: This study aimed at determining the prevalence of hypertension among epistaxics, and the relationship between epistaxis and hypertension., Methods: Retrospective analysis of 62 adults comprising 31 each of males and females with a mean age of 41.4 +/- 16.6 years (range: 18-90 years) that presented in the emergency units of two tertiary health institutions seen over 11 years was done. Main outcome measure was the prevalence of hypertension amongst epistaxics. Seventy-six age and sex-matched patients with bleeding from sites other than the nostrils with no record of epistaxis were selected by simple random sampling as controls., Results: Peak prevalence of epistaxis occurred during the months of January and March. Compared to the controls, the epistaxics had significantly higher blood pressures: (146.1 +/- 40.7 mmHg versus 123.2 +/- 16.3 mmHg systolic, P=0.001), and (91.3 +/- 24.8 mmHg versus 78.2 +/- 12.8 mmHg diastolic, P=0.001), and higher proportions of patients with previous history of hypertension (32.3% versus 7.9%; p<0.001) and family history of hypertension (12.9% versus 2.6%; p<0.02). The proportion of subjects with blood pressure elevation at presentation that remained sustained was significantly higher among the epistaxics than the nonepistaxics (87.5% versus 47.6%, chi2=8.1, P=0.005). The epistaxics had significantly higher prevalence of hypertension than the non-epistaxics (45.2% versus 13.2%, chi2=17.5, p=0.001). Univariate analysis demonstrated association between epistaxis and hypertension (OR=5.4, 95% CI=2.4-12.5, P=0.001), and between epistaxis and age (OR=0.9, 95% CI=1.3-12.5, P=0.02). On multivariate analysis using logistic regression the association between epistaxis and hypertension persisted, after adjusting for age, sex, season and causes of epistaxis (OR=5.6, 95% CI=1.7-15.6, P=0.01)., Conclusions: Our findings support an association between epistaxis and hypertension in the study population.

A number of cardiopulmonary and neurological symptoms are presumed to be associated with hypertension. We examined the prevalence of these symptoms in ED patients with elevated blood pressure (BP) and studied the relationship between symptom prevalence and BP value. We enrolled consecutive adult ED patients with sustained BP elevation (systolic BP>or=140 mm Hg, diastolic BP>or=90 mm Hg). BP values were categorized according to Joint National Committee on Prevention, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure, 6th Report criteria. Elevated BP was noted in 551 (29%) of 1908 patients. Unprompted complaints of hypertension-associated symptoms were noted in 26%, and there was no association between BP category and complaints other than dyspnea. Symptom interviews were conducted in 294 (56%) patients; 68% of this subset noted >or=1 current hypertension-associated symptom with no relationship between symptom prevalence and BP category. We conclude that symptoms putatively associated with hypertension are common among ED patients with elevated BP, and their prevalence appears unrelated to BP value.

The association between epistaxis and hypertension is still disputed. In a cross-sectional study, we evaluated this association in a sample of 1174 individuals older than 18 years, representative of inhabitants of Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. Epistaxis was defined as any episode of non-traumatic nosebleeding after 18 years of age. Hypertension was defined as the mean of two blood pressure readings > or = 160/95 mmHg or the use of antihypertensive drugs. The prevalence of epistaxis and hypertension were 14.7% (95% confidence interval, CI 12.7-16.7) and 24.1% (95% CI 21.7-26.6), respectively. History of epistaxis in the adulthood (risk ratio = 1.24, 95% CI 0.83-1.85), and in the previous 6 months (risk ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.40-1.56; p = 0.510) were not associated with hypertension after controlling for gender, age, race, history of allergic rhinitis or nasal abnormalities, alcohol abuse, smoking and years of study. History of epistaxis was positively associated with history of allergic rhinitis and inversely associated with years at school. In conclusion, we demonstrated that hypertension is not associated with history of epistaxis in the adulthood in free-living individuals.

Background: High blood pressure should be symptomless. However, popular knowledge attributes some symptoms such as headache, epistaxis or dizziness to high blood pressure., Aim: To compare the prevalence of headache, epistaxis, subconjunctival hemorrhages and dizziness in people with normal or high blood pressure., Subjects and Methods: A representative sample of an urban population in Chile was studied. Each subject with high blood pressure was paired with a non-related individual of the same sex and age. These subjects were interrogated about the presence of symptoms., Results: One thousand forty eight subjects with high blood pressure (481 male) and 1052 individuals with normal pressure (483 male), were studied. In subjects with high or normal blood pressure, the prevalence of headache was 22 and 21.8% respectively, epistaxis was 11.6 and 11% respectively, dizziness was 7.4 and 7.6% respectively, tinnitus was 9.1 and 9.4% respectively and subconjunctival hemorrhage was 2.9 and 3.1% respectively (p = NS)., Conclusions: No differences in the prevalence of symptoms, popularly attributed to hypertension, were observed between subjects with normal or high blood pressure.

Background and Purpose: The incidence of primary intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) increases exponentially with age, but the risk factors are not well known. We investigated lifestyle factors, previous diseases, and medications as risk factors for ICH in middle-aged and elderly people., Methods: We compared 98 consecutive patients with primary ICH between 36 and 90 years of age with 206 community-based control subjects matched for age and sex. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) after adjustment for possible confounding variables were calculated by logistic regression., Results: The independent risk factors for ICH were untreated hypertension (OR, 6.95; 95% CI, 3.06 to 15.8), previous ischemic stroke (OR, 3.83; 95% CI, 1.70 to 8.63), epilepsy (OR, 13.8; 95% CI, 2.49 to 76.6), recent strenuous physical exertion (OR, 3.97; 95% CI, 1.95 to 8.10), and a history of epistaxis (OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.28 to 6.62). In men, treated hypertension (OR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.03 to 6.93) was also a significant risk factor. Patients with a history of epistaxis who had used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, especially aspirin in high doses, had an increased risk for ICH (adjusted OR of epistaxis, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.11 to 6.81; adjusted OR of aspirin use, 14.7; 95% CI, 2.03 to 106). In addition, there was a significant (P:<0.01) positive interaction between the history of epistaxis and the use of aspirin on the risk for ICH., Conclusions: Epistaxis is a risk factor for ICH in middle-aged and elderly people, both independently and combined with the use of aspirin. Other independent risk factors are untreated hypertension, previous ischemic stroke, epilepsy, and recent strenuous physical exertion. Epistaxis may be a warning sign of an increased risk for ICH in subjects using aspirin.

Hypertension (HTN) has frequently been cited as a general risk factor for epistaxis. However, studies dealing with this association have yielded equivocal results. In this study, a sample of 121 hypertensives (blood pressure > or = 140/90 mmHg) was selected to evaluate the association between the severity of HTN and a previous history of epistaxis. Patients with an average blood pressure > or = 160/100 mmHg were classified as suffering from a more severe form of HTN and were compared with those with a less severe form of the disease (160/100 mm Hg < or = blood pressure > or = 140/90 mm Hg). The frequency of epistaxis did not differ among patients categorized by the severity of HTN. Users of aspirin were found to be twice as likely to have a history of epistaxis. In addition, there was a statistical tendency for an association between a history of epistaxis and the duration of hypertension. We conclude that the severity of HTN and a history of epistaxis were not associated in a cohort of hypertensive patients. The identification of other risk factors for epistaxis, including the duration of HTN, deserves further study.

In the present investigation, 391 men born in 1913 were examined. The blood pressure was registered in a standardized way and the subjects were questioned about epistaxis. The aim of the investigation was to analyze whether habitual nose-bleeders or subjects with recent bleedings had higher blood pressure than the other subjects in the population study. All attempts to find a correlation between epistaxis and elevated (or high) blood pressure were unsuccessful. When high blood pressure is found in a patient with nose-bleeds it is probably an incidental finding and not an aetiological factor.