{"title":"鼻内瑞芬太尼与利多卡因对喉罩气道插入和心血管反应的促进作用:一项双盲临床试验研究。","authors":"Hamidreza Shetabi, Hossein Mahjobipoor, Mona Bahmani","doi":"10.30476/BEAT.2024.100861.1480","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to assess and compare the effects of intranasal administration of lidocaine and remifentanil on the condition of LMA insertion and cardiovascular response.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From March 2019 to March 2020, this double-blind randomized clinical trial study was conducted on 60 patients, who underwent general anesthesia with LMA insertion at Faiz Hospital, Isfahan, Iran. After induction of anesthesia and before placing the laryngeal mask, the first group received remifentanil 1 μg/Kg, the second group received lidocaine 2% 1 mg/Kg, and the third group received normal saline with the same volume intranasally. The conditions of LMA insertion and hemodynamic changes that occurred during its insertion were investigated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In terms of demographics characteristics (<i>p</i>>0.05), success in placing the LMA on the first try (<i>p</i>=0.73), number of attempts to insert LMA (<i>p</i>=0.61), performance of LMA (<i>p</i>=0.73), need for additional propofol (<i>p</i>=0.53), frequency of gagging (<i>p</i>=0.53), cough (<i>p</i>=0.15) p), and laryngospasm (<i>p</i>=0.99) did not differ significantly. In the remifentanil group, the cardiovascular response to LMA injection was less than that of the lidocaine group. Moreover, both groups were lower than the saline group, but no significant difference was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In facilitating LMA insertion, the effect of intranasal remifentanil was comparable to intranasal lidocaine. Intranasal remifentanil was somewhat more effective than intranasal lidocaine in weakening the cardiovascular response to LMA insertion, but it did not outperform lidocaine.</p>","PeriodicalId":9333,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of emergency and trauma","volume":"12 1","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11057452/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of Intranasal Remifentanil versus Lidocaine on Facilitation of Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion and Cardiovascular Response: A Double-blind Clinical Trial Study.\",\"authors\":\"Hamidreza Shetabi, Hossein Mahjobipoor, Mona Bahmani\",\"doi\":\"10.30476/BEAT.2024.100861.1480\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to assess and compare the effects of intranasal administration of lidocaine and remifentanil on the condition of LMA insertion and cardiovascular response.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From March 2019 to March 2020, this double-blind randomized clinical trial study was conducted on 60 patients, who underwent general anesthesia with LMA insertion at Faiz Hospital, Isfahan, Iran. After induction of anesthesia and before placing the laryngeal mask, the first group received remifentanil 1 μg/Kg, the second group received lidocaine 2% 1 mg/Kg, and the third group received normal saline with the same volume intranasally. The conditions of LMA insertion and hemodynamic changes that occurred during its insertion were investigated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In terms of demographics characteristics (<i>p</i>>0.05), success in placing the LMA on the first try (<i>p</i>=0.73), number of attempts to insert LMA (<i>p</i>=0.61), performance of LMA (<i>p</i>=0.73), need for additional propofol (<i>p</i>=0.53), frequency of gagging (<i>p</i>=0.53), cough (<i>p</i>=0.15) p), and laryngospasm (<i>p</i>=0.99) did not differ significantly. In the remifentanil group, the cardiovascular response to LMA injection was less than that of the lidocaine group. Moreover, both groups were lower than the saline group, but no significant difference was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In facilitating LMA insertion, the effect of intranasal remifentanil was comparable to intranasal lidocaine. Intranasal remifentanil was somewhat more effective than intranasal lidocaine in weakening the cardiovascular response to LMA insertion, but it did not outperform lidocaine.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of emergency and trauma\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11057452/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of emergency and trauma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30476/BEAT.2024.100861.1480\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of emergency and trauma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30476/BEAT.2024.100861.1480","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effect of Intranasal Remifentanil versus Lidocaine on Facilitation of Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion and Cardiovascular Response: A Double-blind Clinical Trial Study.
Objective: This study aimed to assess and compare the effects of intranasal administration of lidocaine and remifentanil on the condition of LMA insertion and cardiovascular response.
Methods: From March 2019 to March 2020, this double-blind randomized clinical trial study was conducted on 60 patients, who underwent general anesthesia with LMA insertion at Faiz Hospital, Isfahan, Iran. After induction of anesthesia and before placing the laryngeal mask, the first group received remifentanil 1 μg/Kg, the second group received lidocaine 2% 1 mg/Kg, and the third group received normal saline with the same volume intranasally. The conditions of LMA insertion and hemodynamic changes that occurred during its insertion were investigated.
Results: In terms of demographics characteristics (p>0.05), success in placing the LMA on the first try (p=0.73), number of attempts to insert LMA (p=0.61), performance of LMA (p=0.73), need for additional propofol (p=0.53), frequency of gagging (p=0.53), cough (p=0.15) p), and laryngospasm (p=0.99) did not differ significantly. In the remifentanil group, the cardiovascular response to LMA injection was less than that of the lidocaine group. Moreover, both groups were lower than the saline group, but no significant difference was observed.
Conclusion: In facilitating LMA insertion, the effect of intranasal remifentanil was comparable to intranasal lidocaine. Intranasal remifentanil was somewhat more effective than intranasal lidocaine in weakening the cardiovascular response to LMA insertion, but it did not outperform lidocaine.
期刊介绍:
BEAT: Bulletin of Emergency And Trauma is an international, peer-reviewed, quarterly journal coping with original research contributing to the field of emergency medicine and trauma. BEAT is the official journal of the Trauma Research Center (TRC) of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS), Hungarian Trauma Society (HTS) and Lusitanian Association for Trauma and Emergency Surgery (ALTEC/LATES) aiming to be a publication of international repute that serves as a medium for dissemination and exchange of scientific knowledge in the emergency medicine and trauma. The aim of BEAT is to publish original research focusing on practicing and training of emergency medicine and trauma to publish peer-reviewed articles of current international interest in the form of original articles, brief communications, reviews, case reports, clinical images, and letters.