A comparison of the Enk Fiberoptic Atomizer Set™ with boluses of topical anaesthesia for awake fibreoptic intubation

15Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We compared the Enk Fiberoptic Atomizer Set™ with boluses of topical anaesthesia administered via the working channel during awake fibreoptic tracheal intubation in 96 patients undergoing elective surgery. Patients who received topical anaesthesia via the atomiser, compared with boluses via the fibreoptic scope, reported a better median (IQR [range]) level of comfort: 1 (1–3 [1–10]) vs. 4 (2–6 [1–10]), p < 0.0001; experienced a reduced total number of coughs: 6 (3–10 [0–34]) vs. 11 (6–13 [0–25]), p = 0.0055; and fewer distinct coughing episodes: 7% vs. 27% respectively, p = 0.0133. The atomiser technique was quicker: 5 (3–6 [2–12]) min vs. 6 (5–7 [2–15]) min, p = 0.0009; and required less topical lidocaine: 100 mg (100–100 [80–160]) vs. 200 mg (200–200 [200–200]), p < 0.0001. Four weeks after nasal intubation, the incidence of nasal pain was less in the atomiser group compared with the control group (8% vs. 50%, p = 0.0015). We conclude that the atomiser was superior to bolus application for awake fibreoptic tracheal intubation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pirlich, N., Lohse, J. A., Schmidtmann, I., Didion, N., Piepho, T., & Noppens, R. R. (2016). A comparison of the Enk Fiberoptic Atomizer SetTM with boluses of topical anaesthesia for awake fibreoptic intubation. Anaesthesia, 71(7), 814–822. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.13496

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free