Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39427184›Full record

ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2024

Comparison of intravenous nalbuphine and dexmedetomidine in combination with lidocaine aerosol inhalation in awake direct laryngoscopy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Xingxing Li, Cuiyu Xie, Yangyang Wu, Weiwei Zhong, Yao Lu, Yuanhai Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Xingxing LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Ambulatory Surgery Center, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, 218 Jixi Road, Hefei, 230022, China.
Cuiyu XieDepartment of Anesthesiology, Ambulatory Surgery Center, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, 218 Jixi Road, Hefei, 230022, China.
Yangyang WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First People's Hospital of Huzhou, Huzhou, Zhejiang, 313000, P.R. China.
Weiwei ZhongDepartment of Anesthesiology, Ambulatory Surgery Center, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, 218 Jixi Road, Hefei, 230022, China.
Yao LuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Ambulatory Surgery Center, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, 218 Jixi Road, Hefei, 230022, China. luyao@ahmu.edu.cn.
Yuanhai LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Ambulatory Surgery Center, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, 218 Jixi Road, Hefei, 230022, China. liyuanhai-1@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe airway should be thoroughly and accurately evaluated before anesthesia induction and endotracheal intubation. Awake direct laryngoscopy (ADL) can provide rapid, accurate, and intuitive airway assessment, especially for suspected difficult airways, and sometimes eliminates the need for fiberoptic intubation in some suspicious difficult airway cases. However, an optimal regimen has not been determined.

methodsIn this double-blind, controlled study, prior to ADL, 60 patients scheduled for general anesthesia were randomly allocated to receive 0.75 μg/kg of dexmedetomidine (Dex group, n = 20), 0.15 mg/kg of nalbuphine (Nal group, n = 20), or a placebo (control group, n = 20) intravenously over 10 min. At the same time, all study subjects received nebulized lidocaine for 15 min. The primary outcome was patient tolerance as assessed by a 5-point ADL comfort score, while secondary outcomes included satisfaction, coughing, pain, nausea and vital signs.

resultsPatients undergoing ADL in the Nal group had higher tolerance scores than those in the control and Dex groups [4 (3,4) vs. 3 (2,2.75), P < 0.017, and 4 (3,4) vs. 2 (2,2,75), P < 0.001, respectively] and higher satisfaction [7 (6,8) vs. 4 (3,5.75), P < 0.017, and 7 (6,8) vs. 5.5 (5,6), P < 0.001, respectively]. Additionally, the Nal group had significantly fewer adverse events, such as pain and nausea than the control and Dex groups. The sedation score and peripheral oxygen and saturation were significantly higher in the Nal group than in the Dex group, with no difference between the Nal and control groups (P < 0.001, P = 0.159, respectively).

conclusionsIntravenous nalbuphine in combination with lidocaine aerosol inhalation significantly improved patient tolerance and satisfaction while reducing nausea, coughing, pain, sedation, and SpO

Indexed as

Awake direct laryngoscopyDexmedetomidineLidocaineNalbuphine

Identifiers

PMID39427184
PMCPMC11490102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.