Randomized controlled trial to examine the tolerability of bronchoscopy with and without pharyngeal laryngeal anesthesia (TACOYAKI study)

IF 2.4 Q2 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM Respiratory investigation Pub Date : 2024-07-27 DOI:10.1016/j.resinv.2024.07.007
{"title":"Randomized controlled trial to examine the tolerability of bronchoscopy with and without pharyngeal laryngeal anesthesia (TACOYAKI study)","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.resinv.2024.07.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, pharyngeal anesthesia such as nebulizer or lidocaine pump spray is the risk of droplet transmission to health care workers from coughing due to spraying anesthesia. Absence of pharyngeal anesthesia may induce coughing and reduce patient and operator satisfaction, but the efficacy of pharyngeal anesthesia under sedation is still limited. Therefore we evaluated a prospective, randomized, single-blind trial to evaluate efficacy of pharyngeal anesthesia in patients receiving sedation.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>We conducted a randomized comparison of pharyngeal anesthesia with or without bronchoalveolar lavage in patients undergoing bronchoscopy at our hospital between March and October 2022. Pharyngeal anesthesia was performed using 8% lidocaine spray and the operators were blinded to eliminate bias. Two hundred patients were entered into the study and divided into two groups: those who received pharyngeal anesthesia(control group) and did not receive pharyngeal anesthesia(test group). The primary endpoint was the operator's satisfaction with the procedure. The secondary endpoints were the patient's cough during the examination as perceived by the operator, cough and discomfort experienced by the patient and the dose of analgesic/sedative/lidocaine administered. These scales were scored from 0 to 100.</p></div><div><h3>Result</h3><p>In primary endpoint, there was no significant difference in the operator-rated procedure satisfaction between the 2 groups. The median for the discomfort score for patients in the control group was tendency higher than in the test group. There were no significant differences in other secondary endpoints.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Pharyngeal anesthesia may not be recommended for flexible bronchoscopy performed under combined sedation and analgesia.</p></div><div><h3>Trial registration</h3><p>Registration number: UMIN000046975Date of registration: 2022/03/07.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20934,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory investigation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory investigation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212534524001084","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, pharyngeal anesthesia such as nebulizer or lidocaine pump spray is the risk of droplet transmission to health care workers from coughing due to spraying anesthesia. Absence of pharyngeal anesthesia may induce coughing and reduce patient and operator satisfaction, but the efficacy of pharyngeal anesthesia under sedation is still limited. Therefore we evaluated a prospective, randomized, single-blind trial to evaluate efficacy of pharyngeal anesthesia in patients receiving sedation.

Materials and methods

We conducted a randomized comparison of pharyngeal anesthesia with or without bronchoalveolar lavage in patients undergoing bronchoscopy at our hospital between March and October 2022. Pharyngeal anesthesia was performed using 8% lidocaine spray and the operators were blinded to eliminate bias. Two hundred patients were entered into the study and divided into two groups: those who received pharyngeal anesthesia(control group) and did not receive pharyngeal anesthesia(test group). The primary endpoint was the operator's satisfaction with the procedure. The secondary endpoints were the patient's cough during the examination as perceived by the operator, cough and discomfort experienced by the patient and the dose of analgesic/sedative/lidocaine administered. These scales were scored from 0 to 100.

Result

In primary endpoint, there was no significant difference in the operator-rated procedure satisfaction between the 2 groups. The median for the discomfort score for patients in the control group was tendency higher than in the test group. There were no significant differences in other secondary endpoints.

Conclusion

Pharyngeal anesthesia may not be recommended for flexible bronchoscopy performed under combined sedation and analgesia.

Trial registration

Registration number: UMIN000046975Date of registration: 2022/03/07.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一项随机对照试验,研究支气管镜检查中咽喉麻醉和不咽喉麻醉的耐受性(TACOYAKI 研究)。
背景:SARS-CoV-2大流行期间,咽部麻醉如雾化器或利多卡因泵喷雾,存在因喷雾麻醉引起咳嗽而将飞沫传播给医护人员的风险。不进行咽部麻醉可能会诱发咳嗽,降低患者和操作者的满意度,但镇静状态下咽部麻醉的疗效仍然有限。因此,我们评估了一项前瞻性、随机、单盲试验,以评价接受镇静剂的患者咽部麻醉的疗效:我们对 2022 年 3 月至 10 月期间在我院接受支气管镜检查的患者进行了咽部麻醉加或不加支气管肺泡灌洗的随机比较。咽部麻醉使用 8% 利多卡因喷雾剂,操作者均为盲人,以消除偏倚。研究将 200 名患者分为两组:接受咽部麻醉组(对照组)和未接受咽部麻醉组(试验组)。主要终点是操作者对手术的满意度。次要终点是操作者感觉到的患者在检查过程中的咳嗽情况、患者的咳嗽和不适感以及镇痛剂/镇静剂/利多卡因的用量。这些量表的评分从 0 到 100.结果:结果:在主要终点方面,两组操作者的手术满意度无明显差异。对照组患者不适感评分的中位数有高于试验组的趋势。结论:在其他次要终点上没有明显差异:结论:在联合镇静和镇痛下进行柔性支气管镜检查时,可能不建议使用咽部麻醉:注册号: UMIN000046975UMIN000046975注册日期:2022/03/07。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Respiratory investigation
Respiratory investigation RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
114
审稿时长
64 days
期刊最新文献
New diagnostic criteria and current issues for pulmonary hypertension Transesophageal ultrasound-guided bronchoscopic Acquire TBNB versus Vizishot2 TBNA needles for neoplastic lesions: A retrospective study Reevaluating diagnosis in interstitial lung disease with a second multidisciplinary discussion Assessment of health-related quality of life in patients with nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease: A comprehensive review Prevalence and characteristics of dysfunctional breathing in patients with asthma in the Japanese population
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1