Cocaine versus xylometazoline to prevent epistaxis after nasotracheal intubation: A randomized trial.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-25 DOI:10.1111/aas.14484
Mo H Larsen, Oscar Rosenkrantz, Andreas Creuzburg, Michael S Kristensen, Lars S Rasmussen, Dan Isbye
{"title":"Cocaine versus xylometazoline to prevent epistaxis after nasotracheal intubation: A randomized trial.","authors":"Mo H Larsen, Oscar Rosenkrantz, Andreas Creuzburg, Michael S Kristensen, Lars S Rasmussen, Dan Isbye","doi":"10.1111/aas.14484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nasotracheal intubation is associated with a risk of epistaxis. Several drugs, including cocaine and xylometazoline may be used as decongestants prior to nasotracheal intubation to prevent this. We hypothesized that xylometazoline would prevent epistaxis more effectively than cocaine, demonstrated by a lower proportion of patients with bleeding after nasotracheal intubation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a single-center, outcome assessor and analyst-blinded, clinical randomized controlled trial following approval from the local research ethics committee and the national medicine agency. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Patients scheduled for surgery under general anesthesia with nasotracheal intubation were randomized to receive either 2 mL 4% cocaine or 2 mL 0.05% xylometazoline prior to nasotracheal intubation. Immediately following intubation, epistaxis was evaluated by the blinded intubating anesthetist on a four-point scale. We measured heart rate and blood pressure the first 5 min after drug administration. Adverse events were followed up after 24 h.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 53 patients received cocaine and 49 patients received xylometazoline. Bleeding occurred in 32 patients receiving cocaine (60.4%) and in 34 patients receiving xylometazoline (69.4%) (p = .41, Fisher's exact test) with a difference of 9.0% (95% CI: -9.4% to 27%). There was no statistically significant difference between groups regarding the heart rate or blood pressure. No adverse cardiac events were recorded in either group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found no statistically significant difference between cocaine and xylometazoline in preventing epistaxis after nasotracheal intubation, and the choice of vasoconstrictor should be based on other considerations, such as pricing, availability and medicolegal issues.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":"1192-1199"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14484","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Nasotracheal intubation is associated with a risk of epistaxis. Several drugs, including cocaine and xylometazoline may be used as decongestants prior to nasotracheal intubation to prevent this. We hypothesized that xylometazoline would prevent epistaxis more effectively than cocaine, demonstrated by a lower proportion of patients with bleeding after nasotracheal intubation.

Methods: We conducted a single-center, outcome assessor and analyst-blinded, clinical randomized controlled trial following approval from the local research ethics committee and the national medicine agency. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Patients scheduled for surgery under general anesthesia with nasotracheal intubation were randomized to receive either 2 mL 4% cocaine or 2 mL 0.05% xylometazoline prior to nasotracheal intubation. Immediately following intubation, epistaxis was evaluated by the blinded intubating anesthetist on a four-point scale. We measured heart rate and blood pressure the first 5 min after drug administration. Adverse events were followed up after 24 h.

Results: A total of 53 patients received cocaine and 49 patients received xylometazoline. Bleeding occurred in 32 patients receiving cocaine (60.4%) and in 34 patients receiving xylometazoline (69.4%) (p = .41, Fisher's exact test) with a difference of 9.0% (95% CI: -9.4% to 27%). There was no statistically significant difference between groups regarding the heart rate or blood pressure. No adverse cardiac events were recorded in either group.

Conclusion: We found no statistically significant difference between cocaine and xylometazoline in preventing epistaxis after nasotracheal intubation, and the choice of vasoconstrictor should be based on other considerations, such as pricing, availability and medicolegal issues.

预防鼻气管插管后鼻衄的可卡因与异甲唑啉:随机试验。
背景:鼻气管插管有鼻衄的风险。在鼻气管插管前,包括可卡因和西甲唑啉在内的几种药物可用作减充血剂来预防鼻衄。我们假设西甲唑啉能比可卡因更有效地预防鼻衄,这体现在鼻气管插管后出血患者的比例较低:在获得当地研究伦理委员会和国家医药机构的批准后,我们进行了一项单中心、结果评估者和分析者盲法临床随机对照试验。我们获得了所有患者的书面知情同意。计划在鼻气管插管全身麻醉下进行手术的患者在鼻气管插管前随机接受 2 mL 4% 可卡因或 2 mL 0.05% 甲基甲唑啉。插管后,盲插管麻醉师立即对鼻衄进行四级评分。我们在用药后最初 5 分钟测量了心率和血压。24 小时后对不良反应进行随访:共有 53 名患者接受了可卡因治疗,49 名患者接受了西甲唑啉治疗。32名接受可卡因治疗的患者(60.4%)和34名接受西甲唑啉治疗的患者(69.4%)发生了出血(P = .41,费舍尔精确检验),差异为9.0%(95% CI:-9.4% 至 27%)。在心率或血压方面,组间差异无统计学意义。两组均未出现不良心脏事件:我们发现可卡因和甲氧甲唑啉在预防鼻气管插管后鼻衄方面没有统计学意义上的显著差异。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信