Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2023
Intranasal sphenopalatine ganglion block by lignocaine spray for postdural puncture headache following spinal anesthesia: a randomized clinical trial.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Smita Shuchi, Dubey Prakash K, Singh Kunal
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: In a randomized clinical study, we investigated the effectiveness of nasal lignocaine spray and swabs in treating postdural puncture headache (PDPH) after spinal anesthesia.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Group S patients received two puffs of lignocaine 10% spray in both nostrils followed by cotton soaked in normal saline, and group B patients received two puffs of saline spray in both nostrils followed by a cotton swab soaked in lignocaine 2%. Patients were assessed before the procedure and 30 minutes, 60 minutes, 2 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h after the procedure for pain relief with the help of a visual analogue scale (VAS). Hemodynamic parameters and adverse effects were also recorded. Normally distributed continuous variables were expressed as mean (95% confidence interval) whereas non-normally distributed variables were expressed as median (IQR). Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare the VAS score at different time points between test and control groups. The difference in means between the two groups was compared using the independent sample t -test. The paired t-test was used to compare the changes in clinical and laboratory variables.
RESULTS: At each time point, the mean VAS score for pain was substantially different between the two groups. Moreover, until the second hour, the VAS score was significantly lower in group S than in group B. No significant intervention-related adverse effect was observed in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Without any noticeable side effects, lignocaine 10% spray is more successful in treating PDPH after spinal anesthesia, particularly in the first two hours.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Group S patients received two puffs of lignocaine 10% spray in both nostrils followed by cotton soaked in normal saline, and group B patients received two puffs of saline spray in both nostrils followed by a cotton swab soaked in lignocaine 2%. Patients were assessed before the procedure and 30 minutes, 60 minutes, 2 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h after the procedure for pain relief with the help of a visual analogue scale (VAS). Hemodynamic parameters and adverse effects were also recorded. Normally distributed continuous variables were expressed as mean (95% confidence interval) whereas non-normally distributed variables were expressed as median (IQR). Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare the VAS score at different time points between test and control groups. The difference in means between the two groups was compared using the independent sample t -test. The paired t-test was used to compare the changes in clinical and laboratory variables.
RESULTS: At each time point, the mean VAS score for pain was substantially different between the two groups. Moreover, until the second hour, the VAS score was significantly lower in group S than in group B. No significant intervention-related adverse effect was observed in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Without any noticeable side effects, lignocaine 10% spray is more successful in treating PDPH after spinal anesthesia, particularly in the first two hours.