Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40542414›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of medical research2025

Upper airway discomfort: a randomized controlled double-blind trial comparing rocuronium and lidocaine spray for intubation.

Tobias Fjærestad, Petter Øyrås, Knut Inge Solbakk, Ann-Chatrin Linqvist Leonardsen

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of medical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05614609 (Discomfort in Upper Airways Due to intubation-a Randomized Controlled Trial in a Norwegian Hospital), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

NCT05614609 nacompletednot on this map

Discomfort in Upper Airways Due to intubation-a Randomized Controlled Trial in a Norwegian Hospital

TypeinterventionalSponsorOstfold University CollegeRan2023 to 2025Enrolled120ConditionsPostoperative Complications, Intubation, Difficult or Failed, Intubation ComplicationArmsLidocaine topical
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

4 authors.

Tobias FjærestadDepartment of Anaesthesia, Ostfold Hospital Trust, Moss, Norway.
Petter ØyråsDepartment of Anaesthesia, Ostfold Hospital Trust, Moss, Norway.
Knut Inge SolbakkDepartment of Anaesthesia, Ostfold Hospital Trust, Moss, Norway.
Ann-Chatrin Linqvist LeonardsenFaculty of Health, Welfare and Organisation, Ostfold University College, Fredrikstad, Norway. ann.c.leonardsen@hiof.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5608-9401

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndotracheal intubation may be performed using deep anesthesia, neuromuscular blocks, or the topical application of anesthetics on the vocal cords. The null hypothesis in this study was that there is no difference in hoarseness one hour after extubation between patients receiving neuromuscular blocks versus lidocaine sprayed on the glottis for endotracheal intubation.

methodsA randomized, controlled, double-blinded study was conducted. A total of 114 patients were included. Group I (n = 58) received rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg. Group II (n = 56) received lidocaine spray 4 ml (20 mg/ml) on the vocal cords. The primary outcome measure was hoarseness one hour after extubation. Secondary outcomes were hoarseness at 24 and 48 h after extubation, sore throat at 1, 24, and 48 h after extubation, and intubation and extubation conditions.

resultsThere was no statistically significant difference between groups in hoarseness one hour after extubation. At 24 h, Group I had significantly more reported hoarseness (27.6%) and observed hoarseness (1.7%) than Group II (12.5% reported) (p = 0.03). Group II had a significantly sorer throat (21.4%) than Group I (1.7%) (p < 0.001) at one hour. Beyond this, there were no differences between groups.

conclusionEven though some differences were observed in hoarseness and sore throat 24 h after extubation, there were few differences between topical lidocaine spray and the use of neuromuscular blocks before intubation for patient-reported and observed outcomes. Consequently, clinicians should choose an approach based on considerations other than those included in this study, such as the need for muscle relaxation or minimizing the number of laryngoscopies. THE STUDY WAS PROSPECTIVELY REGISTERED AT CLINICALTRIALS.GOV : NCT05614609.

Indexed as

Anesthetics, LocalHoarsenessIntubation, IntratrachealLidocaineNeuromuscular Nondepolarizing AgentsRocuroniumAdultAgedDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPharyngitisAnesthetics, LocalLidocaineNeuromuscular Nondepolarizing AgentsRocuroniumIntubationLidocaine sprayNeuromuscular blocksRandomized controlled tria

Identifiers

PMID40542414
PMCPMC12180233

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.