Prevention of sore throat after nasotracheal intubation

Fine, Joseph; Kaltman, Stephen; Bianco, Michael

doi:10.1016/0278-2391(88)90331-x

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The incidence of sore throat postoperatively following tracheal intubation varies considerably [13–15] and is influenced by many factors including the type and size of the tracheal tube [16–19], the placement of a nasogastric tube [20], lubrication [14], administration of succinylcholine [13, 21] and the use of a pharyngeal pack [3, 17].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The efficacy of pharyngeal packing during routine nasal surgery – a prospective randomised controlled study

Basha¹,

McCoy²,

Ullah

et al. 2006

Anaesthesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe efficacy of pharyngeal packing in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing nasal surgery was evaluated in a prospective randomised controlled study. The effect of the presence of the pharyngeal pack on the incidence of postoperative sore throat was also assessed. One hundred patients were randomly allocated to one of two groups; the first had packing and the second received no packing. The placement of a pharyngeal pack was found to have no effect on the incidence of PONV but was associated with a significantly increased incidence of sore throat. The absence of a pharyngeal pack was not associated with an increase in postoperative aspiration or vomiting. We conclude that the routine placement of pharyngeal packs during uncomplicated nasal surgery has no effect on the incidence of PONV and will increase the incidence of postoperative sore throat.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a study of 25 patients, Fine et al . [18] reported an incidence of 80% in 15 patients where a pack had been placed compared to none in the 10 patients where no pack had been used. However, in a study of 62 patients undergoing removal of impacted wisdom teeth Tay et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The efficacy of pharyngeal packing during routine nasal surgery – a prospective randomised controlled study

Basha¹,

McCoy²,

Ullah

et al. 2006

Anaesthesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The thirteen included papers are summarised in Table 1. The majority of papers included patients undergoing nasal and paranasal sinus surgery and two included patients having dental extractions (11,12) .…”

Section: Type and Insertion Of Throat Packmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies were inconsistent in their reporting of patient demographics but of those that gave full information, all but one (12) included more males than females, with mean age ranging from 27 to 50 (9) .…”

Section: Type and Insertion Of Throat Packmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of throat packs in ear, nose and throat, oral and dental surgery: a systematic review

Piromchai

Kasemsiri

Reechaipichitkul

2020

Rhin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Throat packs are placed around the airway in patients undergoing upper airway surgical procedures under general anaesthetic to prevent aspiration or ingestion of blood, and consequent chest infections or postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). There is no definitive evidence for this, and each time a pack is placed, it risks being retained and obstructing the upper airway. This study aimed to determine whether throat packs are of benefit to patients undergoing upper airway surgical procedures.Methods: Medline, Embase and Central were searched from conception to 15th January 2018 using individualised search strategies. A systematic search of multiple databases was undertaken using custom strategies to identify all relevant randomised controlled trials. Screening, risk of bias assessment and data extraction were undertaken independently by two authors. Primary outcomes included throat pain and PONV. Secondary outcomes included any adverse event documented.Results: Thirteen papers were eligible for inclusion. No studies reported any instances of retained throat packs. Ten studies assessed the effect of throat packs on post-operative throat pain, with four papers showing a significantly higher incidence of pain when throat packs were used. One study showed throat pain to be slightly, but significantly, worse 24 hours post-surgery when a pack was not used. No paper showed throat packs to be of benefit in preventing PONV. Conclusion:The study was limited by methodological flaws of included trials, overall relatively low numbers of patients and difficulty in contacting authors to clarify information and obtain raw data. However, this systematic review found no evidence to support the use of throat packs. This supports the proposal that there is no indication for the routine use of throat packs in ENT, maxillofacial and dental procedures.

show abstract

“…[ 2 3 ] Etiological factors playing a significant role in this minor anesthetic complication are: Size of the endotracheal tube, design and pressure of cuff, the use of nasogastric tubes, lubricants, muscle relaxants, duration of surgery, surgery in and around the oral cavity, trauma arising from laryngoscopy, and use of pharyngeal packs. [ 3 4 5 6 ]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of different types of pharyngeal packing in patients undergoing nasal surgery: A comparative study

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context:Postoperative throat complaints such as postoperative sore throat (POST), dysphagia, and hoarseness frequently arises after tracheal intubation and throat packing for patient undergoing general anesthesia. This condition is very disturbing to patient. Avoiding POST is a major priority for these patients because preventing postoperative complications contributes to patient satisfaction.Aims:To describe and analyze the postoperative throat effects of nasopharyngeal packing and oropharyngeal packing in patients undergoing nasal surgery.Settings and Design:A randomized comparative study.Subjects and Methods:After obtaining approval of Ethical Committee 40 patients were included in study. After this patient were randomly allocated into two groups of 20 each. Group A - in which the oropharynx was packed and Group B - inwhich the nasopharynx was packed. General anesthesia were given and throat packing was done and patients were interviewed postoperatively for any throat complications such as sore throat, difficulty in swallowing (dysphagia), hoarseness of voice, throat irritation, and any other symptom pertaining to the study were noted and data were analyzed.Statistical Analysis Used:T-test to compare the age, while Chi-square test and Fisher's exact test were used to compare sex distribution, sore throat, dysphagia, hoarseness, and throat irritation.Results:Results showed statistically significant difference in incidence and severity of POST in Group A patients when compared to Group B patients to be more. Patients in Group A had a higher incidence of dysphagia when compared to their Group B counterparts. With respect to the incidence of hoarseness and throat irritation, there was no statistical significance between the groups.Conclusion:We concluded that the site of pharyngeal packing influences the incidence and severity of POST and as well as the incidence of dysphagia after general anesthesia. The use of nasopharyngeal packing in the patients undergoing nasal surgeries might lead to a reduction of the same.

show abstract

Prevention of sore throat after nasotracheal intubation

Cited by 16 publications

References 5 publications

The efficacy of pharyngeal packing during routine nasal surgery – a prospective randomised controlled study

The efficacy of pharyngeal packing during routine nasal surgery – a prospective randomised controlled study

The use of throat packs in ear, nose and throat, oral and dental surgery: a systematic review

Effects of different types of pharyngeal packing in patients undergoing nasal surgery: A comparative study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About