Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35904640›Full record

Trial reportClinical oral investigations2022

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

Andreas Pabst, Daniel Müller, Daniel G E Thiem, Anton Scherhag, Maximilian Krüger, Diana Heimes, Peer W Kämmerer

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andreas PabstDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Federal Armed Forces Hospital, Rübenacherstr. 170, 56072, Koblenz, Germany. andipabst@me.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4841-7203
Daniel MüllerDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Daniel G E ThiemDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Anton ScherhagDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstraße 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Maximilian KrügerDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Diana HeimesDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Peer W KämmererDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Augustusplatz 2, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThroat 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

methodsOne 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.

resultsA 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.

conclusionThe 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.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, DentalForeign BodiesPharyngitisDyspneaHoarsenessHumansIntubation, IntratrachealNauseaPharynxPostoperative ComplicationsForeign body sensationIntubation anesthesiaOral and maxillofacial surgerySore throatThroat packUpper airway

Identifiers

PMID35904640
OpenAlexW4288690994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.