BACKGROUND: The most recommended technique for the management of patients with a difficult airway is fiberoptic intubation (FOI). The aim of this study was to compare propofol and sevoflurane for FOI performance in patients who were difficult to intubate. METHODS:Seventy-eight patients scheduled for maxillo-facial surgery were included in this prospective, randomized study. The airway was topically anesthetized with lidocaine 5% before performance of FOI with propofol TCI (group P) or sevoflurane (group S). The following parameters were recorded: rate of success, duration of the induction and of the FOI, BIS and PETCO2 values. A visual analogic scale (VAS) was used to monitor the technical difficulties as well as the recall of patients and their satisfaction. The respiratory and hemodynamic complications were also evaluated. RESULTS:Induction and procedure duration were significantly shorter in group S compared with group P. The rate of successful FOI was not different: 38 cases (97%) in group P and 35 cases (90%) in group S. No significant differences were observed between groups regarding BIS values and VAS values for technical difficulties and for patient recall and satisfaction. The incidence of hypertension or tachycardia was significantly higher in group S compared with group P. The incidence of respiratory complications was not significantly different between the groups, but three patients experienced obstructive dyspnea with hypoxemia. CONCLUSION:Propofol and sevoflurane provide a high success rate for the performance of FOI in patients who are difficult to intubate.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The most recommended technique for the management of patients with a difficult airway is fiberoptic intubation (FOI). The aim of this study was to compare propofol and sevoflurane for FOI performance in patients who were difficult to intubate. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients scheduled for maxillo-facial surgery were included in this prospective, randomized study. The airway was topically anesthetized with lidocaine 5% before performance of FOI with propofolTCI (group P) or sevoflurane (group S). The following parameters were recorded: rate of success, duration of the induction and of the FOI, BIS and PETCO2 values. A visual analogic scale (VAS) was used to monitor the technical difficulties as well as the recall of patients and their satisfaction. The respiratory and hemodynamic complications were also evaluated. RESULTS: Induction and procedure duration were significantly shorter in group S compared with group P. The rate of successful FOI was not different: 38 cases (97%) in group P and 35 cases (90%) in group S. No significant differences were observed between groups regarding BIS values and VAS values for technical difficulties and for patientrecall and satisfaction. The incidence of hypertension or tachycardia was significantly higher in group S compared with group P. The incidence of respiratory complications was not significantly different between the groups, but three patients experienced obstructive dyspnea with hypoxemia. CONCLUSION:Propofol and sevoflurane provide a high success rate for the performance of FOI in patients who are difficult to intubate.
Authors: Davide Cattano; Nicholas C Lam; Lara Ferrario; Carmen Seitan; Kash Vahdat; Darrell W Wilcox; Carin A Hagberg Journal: Anesthesiol Res Pract Date: 2012-07-16