A randomized, double-blind study of the ultrasound assessment of the effect of pharyngeal packing on perioperative gastric volume in nasal surgery

M Emrah Temel, Tolga Totoz, Kerem Erkalp, Gulen Safiye Temel, Aysin Selcan, M Emrah Temel, Tolga Totoz, Kerem Erkalp, Gulen Safiye Temel, Aysin Selcan

Abstract

Background: Pharyngeal packing (PP) is commonly performed to reduce the incidence of perioperative blood ingestion (PBI) in nasal surgery (NS), and thus the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This study examined the effects of PP on the perioperative gastric volume (GV) and PONV in patients undergoing NS, by ultrasound assessment.

Methods: Patients undergoing elective NS [septoplasty, septo-rhinoplasty (SRP) and functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS)] were randomised to receive or not receive PP. In the PP group, pharyngeal packs were placed after the orotracheal intubation. Ultrasound assessments were performed for all patients preoperatively (before the anaesthesia induction) and postoperatively (before the extubation). The antero-posterior (AP) and cranio-caudal (CC) antral diameters, antral cross-sectional area (ACSA), and total GV were calculated. PONV incidence and severity were rated. These variables were compared between timepoints and groups, and in the subgroup analyses according to the surgery type. Pearson correlation analysis was performed to assess correlations between the variables.

Results: AP and CC diameters and ACSAs were greater postoperatively than preoperatively in the PP and non-PP groups (n = 44 each; all p < 0.05). Postoperative AP and CC diameters and the ACSA were greater in the non-PP than in the PP group (all p < 0.05). Postoperative AP diameters were greater than preoperatively in patients undergoing SRP and FESS, and the postoperative CC diameter and ACSA were greater than preoperatively in patients undergoing SRP (all p < 0.05). Surgery duration was correlated positively with postoperative AP diameter (r = 0.380, p < 0.05), CC diameter (r = 0.291, p < 0.05), and ACSA (r = 0.369, p < 0.05). Patients who underwent septoplasty surgery, PP was decreased PONV incidence and severity at the first four hours, postoperatively (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: The study findings indicate that PP reduces the increase in the perioperative GV due to PBI in an elective NS. It is therefore a useful and safe means of reducing the risk of perioperative pulmonary aspiration in such surgeries.

Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCT), ACTRN12619000487112 , 25/03/2019, Trial registration retrospectively registered.

Keywords: Gastric volume; Pharyngeal packing; Postoperative nausea and vomiting; Ultrasonography.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Diagram of study flow. SRP, seprorhinoplasty; FESS, functional endoscopic sinus
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Ultrasound image of the gastric antrum (epigastric region) in the parasagittal plane, obtained after 8 h fasting in the preoperative period
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Ultrasound image of the gastric antrum (epigastric region) in the parasagittal plane, obtained in the postoperative period

References

    1. Gan TJ. Risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anesth Analg. 2006;102(6):1884–1898. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000219597.16143.4D.
    1. Al-lami Ali, Amonoo-Kuofi Kwamena, Kulloo Praneta, Lakhani Raj, Prakash Navin, Bhat Nazir. A study evaluating the effects of throat packs during nasal surgery: a randomised controlled trial. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 2017;274(8):3109–3114. doi: 10.1007/s00405-017-4589-5.
    1. Erkalp K, Korkut YA, Meric A, Kahya V, Gedikli O, Su OK, et al. Pharyngeal packing is a predisposing factor for postoperative aphthous stomatitis in nasal surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;142(5):672–676. doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2009.12.040.
    1. Razavi M, Gilani MT, Bameshki AR, Behdani R, Khadivi E, Bakhshaee M. Pharyngeal packing during rhinoplasty: advantages and disadvantages. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;27(6):423–428.
    1. Meco BC, Ozcelik M, Yildirim Guclu C, Beton S, Islamoglu Y, Turgay A, et al. Does type of pharyngeal packing during sinonasal surgery have an effect on PONV and throat pain? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154(4):742–747. doi: 10.1177/0194599815626126.
    1. Basha SI, McCoy E, Ullah R, Kinsella JB. The efficacy of pharygeal packing during routine nasal surgery-a prospective randomised controlled study. Anaesthesia. 2006;61:1161–1165. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2006.04868.x.
    1. Alfiky MG, Margalani OA, Rajeh AF, Alghamdi FE, Abu Suliman OA, Muathen SH, et al. Nasopharyngeal versus hypopharyngeal packing during sino-nasal surgeries: Randomised controlled trial. Clin Otolaryngol. 2018;43(5):1235–1241. doi: 10.1111/coa.13132.
    1. Jin HJ, Kim S, Hwang SH. Can pharyngeal packing prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in nasal surgery? Laryngoscope. 2019;129(2):291–299. doi: 10.1002/lary.27189.
    1. Green R, Konuthula N, Sobrero M, Saini A, Parasher A, Pool C, et al. Use of pharyngeal packs in functional endoscopic sinus surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Larygoscope. 2017;127(11):2460–2465. doi: 10.1002/lary.26651.
    1. Perlas A, Chan VW, Lupu CM, Mitsakakis N, Hanbidge A. Ultrasound assessment of gastric content and volume. Anesthesiology. 2009;111:82–89. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181a97250.
    1. Van de Putte P, Vernieuwe L, Jerjir A, Verschueren L, Tacken M, Perlas A. When fasted is not empty: a retrospective cohort study of gastric content in fasted surgical patients. Br J Anaesth. 2017;118(3):363–371. doi: 10.1093/bja/aew435.
    1. Korttila K. The study of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Br J Anaesth. 1992;69:20–23. doi: 10.1093/bja/69.supplement_1.20S.
    1. Erkalp K, Erkalp NK, Sevdi MS, Korkut AY, Yeter H, Ege SS, et al. Gastric decompression decreases postoperative nausea and vomiting in ENT surgery. Int J Otolarnygology. 2014;143:831–836.
    1. Sexton J, Dohlman L. Benefits of the pharygeal pack. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1989;47:891. doi: 10.1016/S0278-2391(89)80056-4.
    1. Bajwa SJ. Prevention of aspiration of blood with a unique pharyngeal packing method. Anesth Essays Res. 2012;6(2):251–252. doi: 10.4103/0259-1162.108361.
    1. Rizvi MM, Singh RB, Rasheed MA, Sarkar A. Effects of different types of pharyngeal packing in patients undergoing nasal surgery: A comparative study. Anesth Essays Res. 2015;9(2):230–237. doi: 10.4103/0259-1162.156357.
    1. Appadurai IR, Tomkins A. Pharyngeal packing during ENT surgery. Anaesthesia. 2007;62:633–634. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2007.05112_1.x.
    1. Piltcher O, Lavinsky M, Lavinsky J, de Oliveira Basso PR. Effectiveness of hypopharyngeal packing during nasal and sinus surgery in the prevention of PONV. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007;137(4):552–554. doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2007.04.004.
    1. Korkut AY, Erkalp K, Erden V, Teker AM, Demirel A, Gedikli O, Saidoglu L. Effect of pharyngeal packing during nasal surgery on postoperative nausea and vomiting. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;143(6):831–836. doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2010.08.030.
    1. Van de Putte P, Perlas A. Ultrasound assessment of gastric content and volume. Br J Anaesth. 2014;113(1):12–22. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeu151.
    1. Engelhardt T, Webster NR. Pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents in anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 1999;83:453–460. doi: 10.1093/bja/83.3.453.
    1. Raidoo DM, Rocke DA, Brock-Utne JG, Marszalek A, Engelbrecht HE. Critical volume for pulmonary acid aspiration: reappraisal in a primate model. Br J Anaesth. 1990;65:248–250. doi: 10.1093/bja/65.2.248.
    1. Arzola C, Perlas A, Siddiqui NT, Carvalho JC. Bedside gastric ultrasonography in term pregnant woman before elective cesarean delivery: a prospective cohort study. Anesth Analg. 2015;121(3):752–758. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000818.
    1. Bouvet L, Mazoit JX, Chassard D, Allaouchiche B, Boselli E, Benhamou D. Clinical assessment of the ultrasonographic measurement of antral area for estimating preoperative gastric content and volume. Anesthesiology. 2011;114(5):1086–1092. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31820dee48.
    1. Bisinotto FM, Pansani PL, Silveira LA, Naves AA, Peixoto AC, Lima HM, Martins LB. Qualitative and quantitative ultrasound assessment of gastric content. Rev Assoc Med Bras. 2017;63(2):134–141. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.63.02.134.
    1. Bouvet L, Miquel A, Chassard D, Boselli E, Allaouchiche B, Benhamou D. Could a single standardized ultrasonographic measurement of antral area be of interest for assessing gastric contents? A preliminary report. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009;26(12):1015–1019. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32833161fd.
    1. Perlas A, Davis L, Khan M, Mitsakakis N, Chan VW. Gastric sonography in the fasted surgical patient: a prospective descriptive study. Anesth Analg. 2011;113(1):93–97. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31821b98c0.
    1. Kluger MT, Short TG. Aspiration during anaesthesia: a review of 133 cases from the Australian Anaesthetic incident monitoring study (AIMS) Anaesthesia. 1999;54:19–26. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.1999.00642.x.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit