Comparison of Orotracheal versus Nasotracheal Fiberoptic Intubation Using Hemodynamic Parameters in Patients with Anticipated Difficult Airway

BACKGROUND: Both nasal and oral routes can be used for fiberoptic intubation. Often it leads to hemodynamic disturbances, which may have a significant effect in patients with limited cardiopulmonary reserve as well as with cerebrovascular diseases. AIMS: The aim of the study was to evaluate whether there is a clinically relevant difference between the circulatory responses to oral and nasal fiberoptic intubation. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This was a prospective, randomized, and comparative study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, a total of 90 patients with the American Society of Anesthesiologist physical status I and II of either sex in the age group of 18–60 years and having anticipated difficult airway (DA) posted for elective surgery under general anesthesia were randomly allocated into two groups. Patients underwent fiberoptic intubation via either oral or nasal route under sevoflurane anesthesia with bispectral index guidance. Heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), time taken to intubation, and need of maneuver were measured. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: All the analyses were carried out on SPSS 16.0 version (Inc., Chicago, USA). Mean and standard deviation were calculated. The test of analysis between two groups was done by unpaired t-test. RESULTS: Demographic and DA characteristics were similar in both the groups. Significantly (P < 0.01) lesser alteration in HR, SBP, DBP, and MAP was seen in oral fiberoptic intubation when compared to nasal fiberoptic intubation in the early phase of postintubation. Time taken to intubation was also significantly (P < 0.01) lesser in the oral route compared to the nasal route. CONCLUSIONS: Oral fiberoptic intubation causes less hemodynamic alteration and takes less time in comparison to nasal fiberoptic intubation.