Pre-emptive epinephrine nebulization prior to nasotracheal intubation for mandibular fracture fixation surgeries: Does it really differ? A randomised controlled clinical trial

IF 0.6 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2023-04-14 DOI:10.1080/11101849.2023.2200320
Rehab Abdelfattah Abdelraziq, S. Ayoub, Hagar Mahmoud El-Sherief, Mohammed Sayed Shorbagy
{"title":"Pre-emptive epinephrine nebulization prior to nasotracheal intubation for mandibular fracture fixation surgeries: Does it really differ? A randomised controlled clinical trial","authors":"Rehab Abdelfattah Abdelraziq, S. Ayoub, Hagar Mahmoud El-Sherief, Mohammed Sayed Shorbagy","doi":"10.1080/11101849.2023.2200320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Introduction Isolated mandibular fractures as any other fracture are associated with pain and inflammation which possess difficulty for both laryngoscopy and intubation. Nasotracheal intubation is relatively more efficient in individuals with isolated mandibular injuries. Epistaxis is the most common complication of nasal intubation. This study aimed to highlight the role of preoperative usage of epinephrine 1:1000 combined with lidocaine as a nebulization session before induction of anaesthesia as a method to spread vasoconstriction and analgesia. Methods The patients were randomly assigned to one of two equal groups; nasal Lidocaine drops followed by Oxymetazoline nasal drops (OL as control group) or Epinephrine mixed with Lidocaine as nebulization session (EL as the study group). Our primary measures were to estimate the degree of epistaxis and its effect on intubation time. Results Lidocaine with epinephrine as a nebulization session prior to NTI has statistically significant less intubation time (37.8 ± 6.32) versus (42.16 ± 5.1) in the control group with p- value (0.000028). This correlates with higher incidence of moderate nasal bleeding in OL group (7/60 = 11.66%) versus (4/60 = 6.66%) in EL group and P- value = 0.01. EL mixture has a higher priority of decreasing surgical blood loss. Mean± SD measures were (406.86 ± 89.6) and (468.6 ± 139), p-value = 0.00026*in EL and OL groups respectively. Conclusion Despite being time consuming measure. Yet, lidocaine epinephrine nebulization session can be considered as an efficient method for prophylaxis against nasotracheal intubation induced epistaxis, to control intraoperative field bleeding, acts as an adjuvant to control intraoperative pain and protects against postextubation nasal complications.","PeriodicalId":11437,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11101849.2023.2200320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction Isolated mandibular fractures as any other fracture are associated with pain and inflammation which possess difficulty for both laryngoscopy and intubation. Nasotracheal intubation is relatively more efficient in individuals with isolated mandibular injuries. Epistaxis is the most common complication of nasal intubation. This study aimed to highlight the role of preoperative usage of epinephrine 1:1000 combined with lidocaine as a nebulization session before induction of anaesthesia as a method to spread vasoconstriction and analgesia. Methods The patients were randomly assigned to one of two equal groups; nasal Lidocaine drops followed by Oxymetazoline nasal drops (OL as control group) or Epinephrine mixed with Lidocaine as nebulization session (EL as the study group). Our primary measures were to estimate the degree of epistaxis and its effect on intubation time. Results Lidocaine with epinephrine as a nebulization session prior to NTI has statistically significant less intubation time (37.8 ± 6.32) versus (42.16 ± 5.1) in the control group with p- value (0.000028). This correlates with higher incidence of moderate nasal bleeding in OL group (7/60 = 11.66%) versus (4/60 = 6.66%) in EL group and P- value = 0.01. EL mixture has a higher priority of decreasing surgical blood loss. Mean± SD measures were (406.86 ± 89.6) and (468.6 ± 139), p-value = 0.00026*in EL and OL groups respectively. Conclusion Despite being time consuming measure. Yet, lidocaine epinephrine nebulization session can be considered as an efficient method for prophylaxis against nasotracheal intubation induced epistaxis, to control intraoperative field bleeding, acts as an adjuvant to control intraoperative pain and protects against postextubation nasal complications.
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
下颌骨折固定手术鼻气管插管前预先雾化吸入肾上腺素:真的有区别吗?一项随机对照临床试验
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
Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia
Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
78
期刊最新文献
Intrathecal levo-bupivacaine versus hyperbaric bupivacaine for inguinal hernia repairs in ex-preterm infants: A double blinded randomized prospective study Comparison of two different methods as reliable predictors of successful caudal block in children Effect of sevoflurane versus propofol on early cognitive functions in elderly patients after lumbar disc surgery Muscle wasting assessed by ultrasound versus scoring systems as early predictor of outcomes of intensive care unit stay in critically ill patients Posterior quadratus lumborum versus caudal epidural block for perioperative analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing upper abdominal surgeries: Arandomized, double-blind trial
×
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