Article Text

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Design and user experience of Noxeno: a novel nasal foreign body removal device
  1. Aswin Chandran1,
  2. Kapil Sikka1,
  3. Bhinyaram Jat2,
  4. Pooja Kadambi3,
  5. Rohan D'Souza3,
  6. Rakesh Kumar1,
  7. Alok Thakar1,
  8. Suresh Sharma1
  1. 1Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, Delhi, India
  2. 2Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttharakhand, India
  3. 3Research & Development, InnAccel Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore, India
  1. Correspondence to Dr Kapil Sikka, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India; kapil_sikka{at}yahoo.com

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Summary box

What are the new findings?

  • Foreign bodies in nose are a common occurrence in paediatric age group and neglected nasal foreign bodies are prone for various complications like infection, septal perforation, rhinolith formation.

  • No ideal nasal foreign body removal device exists in the general practice with good success rate and few complications.

  • Noxeno, the novel nasal foreign body removal device with its hinge mechanism and in-built light source is a simple, easy to use device with good manoeuvrability.

How might it impact on healthcare in the future?

  • Our novel device is well tolerated among children with good success rate and few adverse events and would enable the primary care physicians in easy removal of nasal foreign bodies.

Introduction

Foreign bodies in nose are a common occurrence both in otolaryngology and general practice and most commonly impacting children 2–5 years of age.1 2 Early removal is paramount to avoid complications like nasal congestion, mucosal ulceration, cartilage loss, rhinolith formation and even aspiration.3 Clinicians who are first contact of medical attention for the child with nasal foreign body (NFB), often tend to use alternative tools not intended for NFB removal to attempt extraction. The tools, like curved hooks, forceps, wax probe, suction catheters, are often employed for retrieval of foreign bodies. The success rates with these tools can be variable and inherent risks are significant. The endoscopic-guided removal by an ear nose and throat (ENT) specialists remains the gold standard for NFB removal which is often unavailable in a resource constraint settings, especially after typical working hours.4

The search for ‘Ideal’ NFB removal device prompted us to produce ‘Noxeno’ which is a novel device designed for anterior NFB removal. This safe device is intended to be used in virtually any setting from a primary care centre under a general physician to a tertiary care centre with an ENT professional. In this prospective study, we …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors KS and SS had conceptualised the design of the device, AC and BJ collected the data, AC, PK and RD analysed the data and wrote the manuscript, KS, AT, RK and SS approved the final version of article.

  • Funding This work was supported by InnAccel Technologies (www.noxeno.in) the company which launched Noxeno commercially in August 2017.

  • Competing interests KS and SS were involved in the initial conceptualisation of the product and are listed as inventors of the device. Both are not a part of Sponsor Company and have no monetary stake in the product. None of the authors have any conflicts of interests.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Ethics approval Institute ethical committee approval was received in October 2016 from All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi with the reference number N-1881. One author PK was involved with a similar study conducted in Apollo Institute Medical Sciences and Research. Thus, while there may be similarities with regards to the product and study design the sites were independent from each other.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.