Trial reportSaudi medical journal2024
Comparison of lidocaine viscous gargle and topical application on laryngeal mask airway in general anesthesia: A randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Saudi medical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postoperative sore throat: a systematic review.Anaesthesia · 2026Pooled it
- Low-dose mivacurium facilitates laryngeal mask airway insertion in patients undergoing hysteroscopic surgery: a prospective, single-center, double-blind randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the effects and safety of lidocaine viscous gargle on postoperative sore throat (POST) in patients receiving a laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in general anesthesia.
methodsIn this randomized controlled trial, 90 patients undergoing urological surgery were allocated into 2 treatment arms (n=45): lidocaine viscous gargle before LMA insertion (Group G) and topical application of lidocaine viscous on the LMA (Group T). Outcome data were collected before placement of LMA (T0), after insertion of LMA (T1), immediately (T2), one hour (T3), and 24 hours after removal of LMA (T4). We analyzed the incidence of POST, pharynx dryness, and adverse events.
resultsThe incidence of POST was lower in Group G than Group T at T2 (11.1% vs. 28.9%;
conclusionLidocaine viscous gargle showed no statistically significant difference in incidence of POST and incidence of pharynx dryness compared with topical application of lidocaine on the LMA. Both approaches were safe for patients receiving LMA.
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.