Cargando…

Comparison of thiopentone with lidocaine spray vs propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion at tikur anbessa specialized hospital. A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Insertion of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) requires an adequate depth of anesthesia. Optimal insertion conditions and hemodynamic stability during LMA insertion are mainly influenced by the choice of the intravenous induction agent. Propofol was recommended as a standard induction agent fo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Belete, Engidawork, W/Yahones, Misrak, Aweke, Zemedu, Dendir, Getahun, Mola, Simeneh, Neme, Derartu, Melaku, Getnet, Ahmed, Siraj, Regasa, Teshome, Tesfaye, Brook
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8187156/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34141417
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102436
_version_ 1783705085972316160
author Belete, Engidawork
W/Yahones, Misrak
Aweke, Zemedu
Dendir, Getahun
Mola, Simeneh
Neme, Derartu
Melaku, Getnet
Ahmed, Siraj
Regasa, Teshome
Tesfaye, Brook
author_facet Belete, Engidawork
W/Yahones, Misrak
Aweke, Zemedu
Dendir, Getahun
Mola, Simeneh
Neme, Derartu
Melaku, Getnet
Ahmed, Siraj
Regasa, Teshome
Tesfaye, Brook
author_sort Belete, Engidawork
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Insertion of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) requires an adequate depth of anesthesia. Optimal insertion conditions and hemodynamic stability during LMA insertion are mainly influenced by the choice of the intravenous induction agent. Propofol was recommended as a standard induction agent for LMA insertion. Due to unavailability and cost for treatment Propofol is not easily availed, thus this study aimed at assessing the effect of thiopentone with lidocaine spray compared to Propofol on hemodynamic change and LMA insertion on the patient undergoing elective surgery. METHODS: Eighty-four participants were followed in a prospective cohort study based on the induction type of either thiopentone-lidocaine group (TL) or Propofol (P). Hemodynamic variables, LMA insertion condition, apneic time, and cost of treatment during the perioperative time were recorded. Data were checked for normality using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Numeric data were analyzed unpaired student's t-test or Manny Whitney test. Categorical data were analyzed by the chi-square test. A p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered a statistically significant difference. RESULT: The comparison of data showed that a significant reduction in mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) in the Propofol group during the first 10 min. The MAP at first minute after LMA insertion was 78.4 ± 5.5 in the Propofol group compared to 81.8 ± 5.6 in thiopentone-lidocaine group p < 0.001. the mean MAP at 5th and 10th minutes after LMA insertion is also significantly lower in the Propofol group compared to the thiopentone-lidocaine group, p < 0.05. There were no statistically significant differences regarding the heart rate change and insertion conditions between the two groups. Mean apneic time was 138 ± 45.8 s in the Propofol group and 85 ± 13.8 s in thiopentone-lidocaine group p < 0.001. Thiopentone-lidocaine group had a lower treatment cost compared to the Propofol group. CONCLUSION: Thiopentone with 10% topical Lignocaine is an alternative for the insertion of LMA to Propofol, with better hemodynamic stability and cost-effectiveness.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8187156
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81871562021-06-16 Comparison of thiopentone with lidocaine spray vs propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion at tikur anbessa specialized hospital. A prospective cohort study Belete, Engidawork W/Yahones, Misrak Aweke, Zemedu Dendir, Getahun Mola, Simeneh Neme, Derartu Melaku, Getnet Ahmed, Siraj Regasa, Teshome Tesfaye, Brook Ann Med Surg (Lond) Cohort Study BACKGROUND: Insertion of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) requires an adequate depth of anesthesia. Optimal insertion conditions and hemodynamic stability during LMA insertion are mainly influenced by the choice of the intravenous induction agent. Propofol was recommended as a standard induction agent for LMA insertion. Due to unavailability and cost for treatment Propofol is not easily availed, thus this study aimed at assessing the effect of thiopentone with lidocaine spray compared to Propofol on hemodynamic change and LMA insertion on the patient undergoing elective surgery. METHODS: Eighty-four participants were followed in a prospective cohort study based on the induction type of either thiopentone-lidocaine group (TL) or Propofol (P). Hemodynamic variables, LMA insertion condition, apneic time, and cost of treatment during the perioperative time were recorded. Data were checked for normality using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Numeric data were analyzed unpaired student's t-test or Manny Whitney test. Categorical data were analyzed by the chi-square test. A p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered a statistically significant difference. RESULT: The comparison of data showed that a significant reduction in mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) in the Propofol group during the first 10 min. The MAP at first minute after LMA insertion was 78.4 ± 5.5 in the Propofol group compared to 81.8 ± 5.6 in thiopentone-lidocaine group p < 0.001. the mean MAP at 5th and 10th minutes after LMA insertion is also significantly lower in the Propofol group compared to the thiopentone-lidocaine group, p < 0.05. There were no statistically significant differences regarding the heart rate change and insertion conditions between the two groups. Mean apneic time was 138 ± 45.8 s in the Propofol group and 85 ± 13.8 s in thiopentone-lidocaine group p < 0.001. Thiopentone-lidocaine group had a lower treatment cost compared to the Propofol group. CONCLUSION: Thiopentone with 10% topical Lignocaine is an alternative for the insertion of LMA to Propofol, with better hemodynamic stability and cost-effectiveness. Elsevier 2021-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8187156/ /pubmed/34141417 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102436 Text en © 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of IJS Publishing Group Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Cohort Study
Belete, Engidawork
W/Yahones, Misrak
Aweke, Zemedu
Dendir, Getahun
Mola, Simeneh
Neme, Derartu
Melaku, Getnet
Ahmed, Siraj
Regasa, Teshome
Tesfaye, Brook
Comparison of thiopentone with lidocaine spray vs propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion at tikur anbessa specialized hospital. A prospective cohort study
title Comparison of thiopentone with lidocaine spray vs propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion at tikur anbessa specialized hospital. A prospective cohort study
title_full Comparison of thiopentone with lidocaine spray vs propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion at tikur anbessa specialized hospital. A prospective cohort study
title_fullStr Comparison of thiopentone with lidocaine spray vs propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion at tikur anbessa specialized hospital. A prospective cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of thiopentone with lidocaine spray vs propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion at tikur anbessa specialized hospital. A prospective cohort study
title_short Comparison of thiopentone with lidocaine spray vs propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion at tikur anbessa specialized hospital. A prospective cohort study
title_sort comparison of thiopentone with lidocaine spray vs propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion at tikur anbessa specialized hospital. a prospective cohort study
topic Cohort Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8187156/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34141417
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102436
work_keys_str_mv AT beleteengidawork comparisonofthiopentonewithlidocainesprayvspropofolforlaryngealmaskairwayinsertionattikuranbessaspecializedhospitalaprospectivecohortstudy
AT wyahonesmisrak comparisonofthiopentonewithlidocainesprayvspropofolforlaryngealmaskairwayinsertionattikuranbessaspecializedhospitalaprospectivecohortstudy
AT awekezemedu comparisonofthiopentonewithlidocainesprayvspropofolforlaryngealmaskairwayinsertionattikuranbessaspecializedhospitalaprospectivecohortstudy
AT dendirgetahun comparisonofthiopentonewithlidocainesprayvspropofolforlaryngealmaskairwayinsertionattikuranbessaspecializedhospitalaprospectivecohortstudy
AT molasimeneh comparisonofthiopentonewithlidocainesprayvspropofolforlaryngealmaskairwayinsertionattikuranbessaspecializedhospitalaprospectivecohortstudy
AT nemederartu comparisonofthiopentonewithlidocainesprayvspropofolforlaryngealmaskairwayinsertionattikuranbessaspecializedhospitalaprospectivecohortstudy
AT melakugetnet comparisonofthiopentonewithlidocainesprayvspropofolforlaryngealmaskairwayinsertionattikuranbessaspecializedhospitalaprospectivecohortstudy
AT ahmedsiraj comparisonofthiopentonewithlidocainesprayvspropofolforlaryngealmaskairwayinsertionattikuranbessaspecializedhospitalaprospectivecohortstudy
AT regasateshome comparisonofthiopentonewithlidocainesprayvspropofolforlaryngealmaskairwayinsertionattikuranbessaspecializedhospitalaprospectivecohortstudy
AT tesfayebrook comparisonofthiopentonewithlidocainesprayvspropofolforlaryngealmaskairwayinsertionattikuranbessaspecializedhospitalaprospectivecohortstudy