| Literature DB >> 35780106 |
Changlin Chen1, Di Wen2, Yizheng Wang2, Hongqiong Li2, Qi Yu2, Mao Li2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spray-as-you-go (SAYGo) airway topical anesthesia and nerve block are common techniques used during awake tracheal intubation. However, their effects have not been described during double-lumen tube intubation. We report on a prospective randomized study that aimed to compare the intubation effects of SAYGo and nerve block patients undergoing thoracic surgery.Entities:
Keywords: Airway topical anesthesia; Double-lumen tube; Intubation; Spray-as-you-go; Superior laryngeal nerve block; Transtracheal injection
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35780106 PMCID: PMC9250180 DOI: 10.1186/s12871-022-01749-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Anesthesiol ISSN: 1471-2253 Impact factor: 2.376
Fig. 1Ultrasound-guided SLN block and transtracheal injection. Note: a The tissue structure around the SLN under sagittal ultrasound, b the sagittal out-of-plane puncture under ultrasound. 2 ml of 2% lidocaine solution was injected into the thyroglossal membrane. c The location of the cricothyroid membrane under coronal ultrasound
Fig. 2The technique of spray-as-you-go airway topical anesthesia. Note: a A FIS with an epidural catheter was inserted into the working channel. One end of the catheter was connected to a syringe containing 2% lidocaine, b the spray on the glottis under the FIS, c The anesthetic was sprayed through the side hole of the epidural catheter, d Spraying of the carina and bronchi under the FIS
Summary of the baseline characteristics of the study participants
| Basic information | Group C ( | Group U ( | Group F ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 54.89 ± 7.48 | 49.38 ± 11.56 | 52.24 ± 11.67 |
| Male/female | 11/8 | 12/9 | 13/8 |
| Height (cm) | 160.26 ± 6.00 | 163.57 ± 6.51 | 164.43 ± 8.54 |
| Weight (kg) | 60.89 ± 9.76 | 58.90 ± 9.58 | 62.24 ± 10.13 |
| BMI | 23.65 ± 3.15 | 21.95 ± 2.77 | 22.95 ± 2.77 |
| ASA classification (I/II) | 4/15 | 6/15 | 3/18 |
| Intubation site (left/right) | 13/6 | 14/7 | 13/8 |
| With tube time (min) | 168.63 ± 56.92 | 197.14 ± 74.31 | 176.05 ± 50.08 |
Summary of the changes in mean arterial pressure (MAP)
| Point in time | Group C ( | Group U ( | Group F ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MAP (mmHg) | T0 | 96.21 ± 11.26 | 94.57 ± 11.58 | 94.62 ± 11.04 |
| T1 | 74.74 ± 11.92* | 75.81 ± 10.69* | 79.67 ± 7.97* | |
| T2 | 112.47 ± 13.48* | 94.81 ± 18.02 | 88.33 ± 9.65 | |
| T3 | 94.89 ± 12.73 | 84.48 ± 13.45* | 79.76 ± 7.09* | |
| T4 | 88.84 ± 12.65* | 84.14 ± 13.26* | 79.57 ± 7.84* | |
| T5 | 98.32 ± 12.33 | 95.00 ± 13.52 | 90.29 ± 10.22 |
*P < 0.05 Compared to the base value
Fig. 3The observed trends in mean arterial pressure (MAP) of the three groups of patients
Summary of the changes in HR
| Point in time | Group C ( | Group U ( | Group F ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (bpm) | T0 | 83.63 ± 9.87 | 83.19 ± 11.12 | 79.67 ± 9.60 |
| T1 | 80.16 ± 11.91 | 75.76 ± 10.29* | 76.81 ± 12.15 | |
| T2 | 99.21 ± 9.55* | 89.14 ± 16.26 | 85.81 ± 19.20 | |
| T3 | 90.32 ± 10.90* | 82.19 ± 13.46 | 79.71 ± 13.55 | |
| T4 | 84.21 ± 9.25 | 79.05 ± 12.40 | 78.95 ± 13.12 | |
| T5 | 88.37 ± 21.40 | 83.19 ± 19.33 | 79.71 ± 14.46 |
*P < 0.05 Compared to the base value
Fig. 4The observed trends in heart rate (HR) of the three groups of patients
Summary of the occurrence of adverse events
| Adverse events | Group C ( | Group U ( | Group F ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| High blood pressure | 10 | 6 | 1† |
| Tachycardia | 9 | 9 | 4 |
| Low blood pressure | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| Bradycardia | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Throat bleeding | 0 | 4 | 0 |
†P < 0.05 Compared to group C
Summary of postoperative follow-up
| Group C ( | Group U ( | Group F ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hoarse (mild/medium/heavy) | 6/3/0 | 7/3/0 | 8/3/0 |
| Sore throat (mild/medium/severe) | 0/2/0 | 0/1/0 | 2/0/0 |
| Patient satisfaction score | 94.47 ± 3.42 | 95.19 ± 3.78 | 96.76 ± 2.72 |