Rahmat Ameen Noorazyze Nurzohara Aisha Noorazyze, Nor Nadia Md, Zain Jaafar Md, Mohamad Yusof Aliza, Yong Liu Chian
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Hospital Raja Permaisuri Bainun, Ipoh, Malaysia.
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Sep 20;9:979275. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.979275. eCollection 2022.
Insertion of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) without muscle relaxant requires adequate obtundation of airway reflexes, which may otherwise lead to incorrect or failed LMA placement. This study compared topical lignocaine spray vs. intravenous (IV) fentanyl, during propofol induction for insertion of the ProSeal™ LMA (PLMA). This was a prospective, randomized, double blind study, in ASA I or II patients, for elective or emergency surgery. Seventy patients ( = 70) who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to receive IV fentanyl 2 mcg/kg or topical lignocaine spray 40 mg, prior to anesthesia induction with IV propofol (2-2.5 mg/kg). ProSeal™ LMA insertion condition was regarded optimal in the absence of adverse responses (gag, cough, laryngospasm and body movements), and successful LMA placement at the first attempt. Hemodynamic parameters were recorded and patients were assessed for sore throat and hoarseness post operatively. Seventy patients were analyzed. The number of patients with optimal PLMA insertion conditions were comparable between the groups (60% vs. 57%, = 0.808). All hemodynamic parameters were comparable between groups with the exception of heart rate. Sympathetic obtundation of heart rate was greater with IV fentanyl than topical lignocaine ( < 0.05). The proportion of patients with postoperative sore throat significantly increased with the number of insertion attempts ( < 0.05). Topical lignocaine spray to the pharynx is as effective, and may be an alternative to IV fentanyl, during propofol induction for PLMA insertion. Success rate and optimal insertion condition at the first attempt, propofol requirement, blood pressure, adverse events and airway complications were comparable. Heart rate obtundation was less with topical lignocaine spray but remained within clinically acceptable values.
在不使用肌肉松弛剂的情况下插入喉罩气道(LMA)需要充分抑制气道反射,否则可能导致LMA放置错误或失败。本研究比较了在丙泊酚诱导插入ProSeal™喉罩(PLMA)期间,局部应用利多卡因喷雾剂与静脉注射(IV)芬太尼的效果。这是一项针对ASA I或II级患者进行择期或急诊手术的前瞻性、随机、双盲研究。70名符合纳入标准的患者在静脉注射丙泊酚(2 - 2.5mg/kg)诱导麻醉前,被随机分配接受2mcg/kg的静脉芬太尼或40mg的局部利多卡因喷雾剂。在没有不良反应( gag反射、咳嗽、喉痉挛和身体运动)且首次尝试成功放置LMA的情况下,ProSeal™喉罩插入条件被视为最佳。记录血流动力学参数,并在术后评估患者的咽痛和声音嘶哑情况。对70名患者进行了分析。两组间具有最佳PLMA插入条件的患者数量相当(60%对57%,P = 0.808)。除心率外,两组间所有血流动力学参数均相当。静脉注射芬太尼对心率的交感神经抑制作用大于局部利多卡因(P < 0.05)。术后咽痛患者的比例随插入尝试次数的增加而显著增加(P < 0.05)。在丙泊酚诱导插入PLMA期间,咽部局部应用利多卡因喷雾剂同样有效,并且可能是静脉注射芬太尼的一种替代方法。首次尝试的成功率和最佳插入条件、丙泊酚需求量、血压、不良事件和气道并发症相当。局部应用利多卡因喷雾剂对心率的抑制作用较小,但仍在临床可接受范围内。