Effects of throat packs in upper airway surgery under intubation anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Throat packs (TP) are used in upper airway surgery to avoid accumulation and aspiration of blood, foreign bodies, and fluids. But side effects such as sore throat and TP retention have been reported and challenge the standardized use of TP. The aim of this study is to compare benefits and side effects of TP versus no TP for upper airway procedures in intubation anesthesia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred forty-eight patients with surgical interventions at the upper airway under intubation anesthesia were included. Of those, n = 74 each were treated without (A, control) and with (B) TP. Study group B was subdivided whether TP was placed by the surgeon (B1; n = 37) or by the anesthesiologist (B2; n = 37). TP-related side effects such as sore throat, foreign body sensation, hoarseness, dyspnea, difficulty of swallowing, nausea, retching, nausea, aspiration, and pneumonia as well as the influence of TP design and the applicant (surgeon or anesthetist) were analyzed. RESULTS: A significantly increased rate of difficulty of swallowing (p = 0.045), intensity of sore throat (p = 0.04), and foreign body sensation (p = 0.024) was found in group B when compared to group A. There was no correlation between hoarseness, dyspnea, nausea, retching, and TP. No case of aspiration or pneumonia was seen but one TP was accidentally forgotten in the patient. B2 showed an increased frequency of difficulty swallowing, followed by A and B1. B1 led to the highest incidence of nausea followed by the A and B2. CONCLUSION: The use of TP led to a high rate of side effects without showing the propagated advantages. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of TP must be considered critically and cannot generally be recommended without specific reasons, such as high aspiration risk.

Perfusion index and plethysmographic variability index in patients with interscalene nerve catheters.

BACKGROUND: Interscalene nerve blocks provide adequate analgesia, but there are no objective criteria for early assessment of correct catheter placement. In the present study, pulse oximetry technology was used to evaluate changes in the perfusion index (PI) in both blocked and unblocked arms, and changes in the plethysmographic variability index (PVI) were evaluated once mechanical ventilation was instituted. METHODS: The PI and PVI values were assessed using a Radical-7™ finger pulse oximetry device (Masimo Corp., Irvine, CA, USA) in both arms of 30 orthopedic patients who received an interscalene catheter at least 25 min before induction of general anesthesia. Data were evaluated at baseline, on application of local anesthetics; five, ten, and 15 min after onset of interscalene nerve blocks; after induction of general anesthesia; before and after a 500 mL colloid fluid challenge; and five minutes thereafter. RESULTS: In the 25 patients with successful blocks, the difference between the PI values in the blocked arm and the PI values in the contralateral arm increased within five minutes of the application of the local anesthetics (P < 0.05) and increased progressively until 15 min. After induction of general anesthesia, the PI increased in the unblocked arm while it remained relatively constant in the blocked arm, thus reducing the difference in the PI. A fluid challenge resulted in a decrease in PVI values in both arms. CONCLUSION: The perfusion index increases after successful interscalene nerve blockade and may be used as an indicator for successful block placement in awake patients. The PVI values before and after a fluid challenge can be useful to detect changes in preload, and this can be performed in both blocked and unblocked arms.