ArticleAdvanced biomedical research2023
Comparison of Success Rate and Safety of Nasotracheal Intubation by Conventional and Finger-Guided Method in Patients Undergoing Maxillofacial Surgery.
Article in Advanced biomedical research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Different techniques have been introduced to reduce the complications of nasotracheal intubation. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of nasotracheal intubation complications in finger-guided and conventional methods. Materials and Methods: In this double-blind randomized trial study, 70 patients who were candidates for oral and maxillofacial surgery who required nasal intubation were included in the study finally of which 33 patients with conventional method and 35 patients with finger-guided tubes in the nasopharynx were analyzed at the end of the study. Variables such as success rate, hemodynamic response, and complications of intubation were compared between the two groups. Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of hemodynamic response to intubation ( Conclusion: Nasotracheal intubation using the finger guiding technique in the nasopharynx is associated with a higher success rate and less complications after intubation such as epistaxis and submucosal intubation compared to the conventional method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.