Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 298127

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : January | Volume : 16 | Issue : 1 | Page : UC09 - UC13 Full Version

Effect of Preoperative Ketamine Nebulisation on Attenuation of Incidence and Severity of Postoperative Sore Throat, Hoarseness of Voice and Cough: A Randomised Double-blind Study


Published: January 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/49872.15824
Veena Patodi, Naveen Kumar Jangid, Meera Kumari, Surendra Kumar Sethi, Neena Jain, Kavita Jain

1. Senior Professor and Head, Department of Anaesthesiology, J.L.N. Medical College and Hospital, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India. 2. Junior Resident, Department of Anaesthesiology, J.L.N. Medical College and Hospital, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India. 3. Assistant Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, J.L.N. Medical College and Hospital, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India. 4. Associate Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, J.L.N. Medical College and Hospital, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India. 5. Senior Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, J.L.N. Medical College and Hospital, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India. 6. Senior Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, J.L.N. Medical College and Hospital, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India.

Correspondence Address :
Surendra Kumar Sethi,
Flat No. 202, Shiva Enclave, Civil Lines, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India.
E-mail: drsurendrasethi80@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Postoperative Sore Throat (POST) occurs in a majority i.e., upto 62% of patients who undergo endotracheal intubation under general anaesthesia. Ketamine nebulisation has been reported to reduce the incidence and severity of POST.

Aim: To evaluate the effect of ketamine nebulisation on incidence and severity of POST, hoarseness of voice and cough.

Materials and Methods: This prospective, randomised, double-blind study was conducted between September 2020 to February 2021 at J.L.N. Medical College, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India. Total of 100 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II patients were enrolled, and randomly allocated into two groups of 50 each. The patients in Group K (n=50) were nebulised with ketamine (50 mg) with 4 mL normal saline (NS) and in Group S (n=50) were nebulised with 5 mL NS 15 minutes prior to endotracheal intubation. The incidence and severity of POST, hoarseness of voice and cough were assessed just after extubation (0 hour) and thereafter at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 hours postoperatively. Haemodynamic parameters {Heart Rate, (HR) Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP), Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP), Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP), and Oxygen Saturation (SpO2)} were noted before and after nebulisation, and just after intubation. Side-effect profile was also noted. The data from patients was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA, version 21.0 for windows).

Results: Mean age of Group S was 36.22±9.386 years and Group K was 37.40±9.604 years (p-value=0.534). The incidence and severity of POST was significantly lower in patients in Group K at 0 hours (p-value=0.003), at 2 hours (p-value=0.001), at 4 hours (p-value=0.003), at 6 hours (p-value=0.004) and at 12 hours (p-value=0.003), when compared to patients in Group S. The incidence and severity of cough was also significantly lower in patients in Group K at 0 hours, 2 hours, 4 hours and 6 hours (p-value <0.001). Incidence and severity of postoperative hoarseness of voice in Group K was significantly less as compared to Group S at 0 hours, 2 hours, 4 hours and 6 hours (p-value <0.001) and at 12 hours (p-value=0.001). No significant haemodynamic changes (p-value >0.05) and side-effects (p-value=0.727) were noted in both the groups.

Conclusion: Preoperative ketamine nebulisation was found to be effective in reducing the incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat, hoarseness of voice and postoperative cough after general anaesthesia with endotracheal intubation along with no or minimal haemodynamic changes and side-effects.

Keywords

Endotracheal intubation, General anaesthesia, Haemodynamic parameters, N-Methyl D-Aspartate receptor antagonist

Sore throat, hoarseness of voice and cough are common complications following extubation in immediate postoperative period in patients receiving general anaesthesia. Although Postoperative Sore Throat (POST) is usually a self-limiting condition but it may lead to patient discomfort and dissatisfaction (1). The incidence of POST ranges from 21% to 65% (2),(3). POST can develop due to various perioperative conditions like airway irritation and inflammation, large sized endotracheal tube (4), prolonged duration of surgery (5), excessive movement of endotracheal tube and cuff during patient positioning, airway trauma due to rigid stylet during intubation and prone position (6).

Several non pharmacological methods like appropriate sized endotracheal tubes, gentle laryngoscopy and intubation with minimal duration, using advanced laryngoscopes and maintaining cuff pressure <20 cm of H2O and pharmacological methods like systemic, topical or aerosolized steroids, gargles or nebulisation with magnesium sulfate, ketamine or local anaesthetics, non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and benzydamine gargles or spray on endotracheal tube cuff and oral mucosa have been practised to reduce the incidence and severity of POST (7).

Various factors are responsible for development of POST including pharyngolaryngeal mucosal trauma during laryngoscopy, nasogastric tube insertion or oral suctioning, decreased tracheal mucosal capillary perfusion due to cuff pressure and design, oversized endotracheal tube causes oedema and mucosal lesion. The N-Methyl D-Aspartate (NMDA) receptors are present not only in the central nervous system but also in the peripheral nerves (8),(9). It has been reported that NMDA receptor antagonists like ketamine acts as an antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory agent when given through the peripheral routes (10),(11).

Although ketamine has been used as a gargle (12),(13) for attenuation of POST by its action on peripheral NMDA receptors in several studies but a limited number of studies has been carried out with nebulised ketamine (13),(14),(15),(16),(17). Preoperative ketamine gargles has an unpleasant taste as well as a larger volume is required for its action so ketamine nebulisation may avoid the drawbacks associated with ketamine gargles (13). Usually, a fixed dose of ketamine nebulisation (50 mg in 5 mL normal saline) has been used in prevention of POST.

It has been hypothesised that preoperative nebulisation with ketamine would attenuate the incidence and severity of POST, hoarseness of voice and cough. So, the present study was planned to evaluate the role of preoperative ketamine nebulisation on the incidence and severity of POST, hoarseness of voice and cough in patients undergoing various surgeries under general anaesthesia with endotracheal intubation.

Material and Methods

This prospective, randomised, double-blind study was conducted between September 2020 to February 2021 at J.L.N. Medical College, Ajmer, Rajasthan, India. The trial is registered with clinical trials registry-India (CTRI/2020/08/027485) after obtaining the approval from Institutional Ethical Committee (979-Acad/III/MCA/2019).

Sample size calculation: Based on a previous study (16), the sample size was calculated on the basis of assumption of incidence of POST to be 65%. So, an estimated 50% reduction in the incidence of POST with ? error of 0.05, 95% confidence interval and 90% power, would require atleast 46 patients in each group to become clinically significant. Finally, sample size was taken as 100 with 50 patients in each group after adding 10% patients for possible dropouts during follow-up.

Inclusion criteria: Patients of either sex, 18-60 years of age belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II undergoing various elective surgeries under general anaesthesia requiring endotracheal intubation were included in this study.

Exclusion criteria: Patients who were not willing to participate in the study, patients allergic to study drug, and history of preoperative sore throat, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, patients on chronic medications like non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, steroids etc., were excluded from the study. Patients with any psychiatric illness and history of seizures, neurosurgical patients with raised intracranial pressure, patients with history of ischaemic or coronary artery disease and myocardial infarction, pregnant females, patients with anticipated difficult airway and who required >1 attempt during intubation or intubation time >15 seconds and patients posted for oral, head and neck surgeries were also excluded from the study.

The study population was randomly allocated into two groups with 50 patients each, using computer generated table of random numbers. The patients in Group K (n=50) received ketamine nebulisation 50 mg (1 mL) with 4 mL normal saline (total volume=5 mL) and patients in Group S (n=50) received nebulisation with 5 mL normal saline (total volume=5 mL) (Table/Fig 1).

Procedure

Preanaesthetic evaluation was done the day before surgery which included thorough history, physical examination and routine investigations. On the day of surgery, after arrival of the patient in preoperative area, baseline vital parameters were recorded. An intravenous (i.v.) cannula was secured and ringer lactate was started. The patients received the study drug via nebulisation mask connected to wall mounted oxygen driven source (8 L, 50 psi) for 15 minutes prior to general anaesthesia. The resident anaesthesiologist who nebulised the patients later did not participate in the further assessment of these patients. The patients were assessed thereafter by another anaesthesiologist. The patients were not aware of group allocation as the study drug was colourless and tasteless (preservative free).

After 10 minutes of nebulisation, the patients were induced for general anaesthesia. All patients were premedicated with glycopyrrolate 0.004 mg/kg i.v. and tramadol 1.5 mg/kg i.v. Preoxygenation was done with 100% Oxygen (O2) for 3 minutes. Patients were induced with propofol 2 mg/kg i.v. and endotracheal intubation was facilitated with succinylcholine 1.5 mg/kg i.v. Trachea was intubated with an appropriate sized cuffed polyvinyl chloride endotracheal tube followed by cuff inflation using air with no audible leak and bilateral equal air entry in lung fields at peak airway pressure of 20 cm water (H2O). General anaesthesia was maintained with oxygen (50%) in nitrous oxide (50%), atracurium and sevoflurane (1-1.2 MAC). Ondansetron 4 mg i.v. was given 30 minutes prior to end of surgery.

After completion of surgery, the neuromuscular blockade was reversed with neostigmine 0.05 mg/kg i.v. and glycopyrrolate 0.008 mg/kg i.v. Tracheal extubation was done after the patient become fully conscious following the verbal commands with return of spontaneous respiration and adequate muscle power. Lignocaine 1.5 mg/kg i.v. was given, if patient had excessive coughing during tracheal extubation.

The study parameters (sore throat, hoarseness of voice and cough) were assessed at prenebulisation (baseline before nebulisation), preinduction (after nebulisation just before induction of general anaesthesia), immediate recovery (0 hour after extubation) and postoperative period (at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 hours).

After shifting the patient to postoperative ward, sore throat, hoarseness of voice and cough was assessed by the resident anaesthesiologist who was unaware of the group allocation of the patient at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 hours postoperatively from the time of extubation. All of these study parameters (POST, postoperative cough and postoperative hoarseness of voice were graded on a four-point scale (0-3) (12).

Postoperative Sore Throat (POST): POST was graded as:

• 0=no sore throat at any time since the operation,
• 1=minimal (patient answered in the affirmative when asked about sore throat),
• 2=moderate (patient complain of sore throat on his/her own), and
• 3=severe (patient is in obvious distress).

Hoarseness of voice: Hoarseness of voice was graded as:

• 0=no complaint of hoarseness at any time since the operation,
• 1=minimal (minimal changes in quality of speech, patient answers in the affirmative only when enquired about),
• 2=moderate (moderate changes in quality of speech of which the patient complains on his/her own), and
• 3=severe (gross changes in the quality of voice perceived by the observer).

Cough: Cough was graded as

• 0=no cough at any time since the operation,
• 1=mild (single cough),
• 2=moderate (more than one episode of unsustained coughing for ≤5 seconds) and
• 3=severe (sustained bout of coughing for >5 seconds).

The various haemodynamic parameters including Heart Rate (HR), Systolic blood pressure (SBP), Diastolic Blood Pressure (SBP), Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) and oxygen saturation (SpO2) were recorded at baseline, postnebulisation and postintubation. Various side-effects were also recorded which included tachycardia (HR >100 beats/min), bradycardia (HR <60 beats/min), hypertension (SBP ≥140 mmHg or DBP ≥90 mmHg)), hypotension (SBP <90 mmHg or DBP <60 mmHg), respiratory depression (respiratory rate <12/min), Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV) and hallucination.

Statistical Analysis

The data from patients was analysed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Inc., Chicago, IL, USA, version 21.0 for windows. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used for normality of age, weight and haemodynamic variables while the differences in the age and weight was done using an independent student t test. The various haemodynamic variables between two groups (intergroup) were compared with student t test and within groups (intragroup) were compared using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). The differences in the incidence of POST between two groups were compared with Fisher’s-test or Chi square test which ever was applicable. The severity of POST between two groups was compared with Mann-Whitney U test. The p-value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

Results

Both groups were comparable in terms of demographic profile i.e., age (p-value=0534), gender (p-value=0.523), ASA physical status (p-value=0.695) and duration of surgery (p-value=0.949) (Table/Fig 2).

Both groups showed no statistically significant changes in various haemodynamic or vital parameters i.e., mean HR, mean SBP, mean DBP, mean MAP and mean SpO2 before and after the nebulisation, and after intubation (p>0.05) (Table/Fig 3).

The overall incidence of POST in the present study was 34%. A total of 24 (48%) patients in Group S and 10 (20%) patients in Group K had POST at some point of the study. Severity of POST was significantly reduced in Group K compared to Group S, at different time intervals. No patient had severe POST in both groups after 2nd hour, and moderate POST after 4th hour postoperatively (Table/Fig 4).

Similarly, the overall incidence of postoperative hoarseness of voice was 54%. A total of 44 (88%) patients in Group S and 10 (20%) patients in Group K had hoarseness of voice at some point of the study. Severity of hoarseness of voice was significantly reduced in Group K compared to Group S at different time intervals. No patient had hoarseness of voice after 2nd hour postoperatively in Group K (Table/Fig 5).

The overall incidence of postoperative severity of cough was 23%; 20 (40%) patients in Group S and 3 (6%) patients in Group K had cough at some point of the study. Severity of cough was significantly reduced in Group K compared to Group S at different time intervals. No patient had cough after 2nd hour postoperatively in Group K (Table/Fig 6).

About side-effects, 2 (4%) patients in Group K and 3 in Group S had PONV, while 2 patients in Group K and 2 in Group S had hypotension but these were statistically insignificant between two groups (p-value >0.05). No other side-effects were noted among two groups (Table/Fig 7).

Discussion

Although N-Methyl D-Aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists have been tried by different authors with variable success (1),(7), but a limited number of studies have been done where ketamine was used for nebulisation. Ketamine has been used as a gargle for reducing the incidence and severity of POST. So authors planned a study to evaluate and strengthen the fact that ketamine nebulisation would be effective in reducing the incidence and severity of POST, hoarseness of voice and cough. The overall incidence and severity of POST, hoarseness of voice and cough were found to be significantly reduced in Group K as compared to Group S. A significantly lesser number of patients in Group K had POST (10 versus 24), hoarseness of voice (10 versus 44) and cough (3 versus 20) when compared to patients in Group S.

Ketamine has shown a definitive role in reducing the incidence and severity of POST. The probable mechanism of this effect was due to both topical effect of ketamine nebulisation which has reduced the local inflammation as well as due to peripheral analgesic effect of ketamine. NMDA receptors are found not only in central nervous system but also in the peripheral nerves. Ketamine, an NMDA receptor antagonist has its primary site of action in the central nervous system, and parts of the limbic system while its peripheral effect is suggested via various routes like gargles, nasal or rectal route. NMDA receptors has known to have a role in inflammation and nociception. The available literature showed the topical effect of ketamine via its NMDA antagonistic action while its anti inflammatory effect based on animal model data, thus preventing POST (14),(15),(16),(17),(18).

Ahuja V et al., and Aditya AK et al., have used 50 mg ketamine nebulisation in study group and 5 mL NS in control group and found that ketamine nebulisation significantly attenuated the incidence and severity of POST, especially during the early postoperative period, with no adverse effects, which is similar to the present study (16),(19). The recovery from general anaesthesia was also found to be faster in ketamine group. Similarly, Mehrotra S et al., evaluated the effects of ketamine, lignocaine and budesonide nebulisation on the incidence on POST (20). They concluded that sore throat has significantly reduced with ketamine in early postoperative period while lignocaine nebulisation was found to be effective in reducing cough with better long term outcome with budesonide nebulisation. Kumar R compared ketamine nebulisation (50 mg) with ketamine gargle (50 mg) to evaluate their effect on the incidence of POST and found preoperative ketamine nebulisation more effective in reducing POST when compared to ketamine gargle which are in concordance with results of the present study (21).

Jain S and Barasker SK compared the efficacy of isotonic MgSO4 (3 mL), 50 mg ketamine (3 mL) and NS (3 mL) for preoperative nebulisation in patients posted for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (22). They concluded that incidence of POST was significantly lesser with ketamine nebulisation when compared to MgSO4 nebulisation. Similarly, Reddy M and Fiaz S compared the effectiveness of three different doses (0.5 mg/kg, 1 mg/kg and 1.5 mg/kg) for ketamine nebulisation for 15 minutes duration and 5 minutes prior to intubation (18). They concluded that the dose of 0.5 mg/kg was found to be less effective than 1 mg/kg and 1.5 mg/kg doses. Charan SD et al., also compared the efficacy of two different doses (25 and 50 mg) of ketamine nebulisation and found both of the doses effective in preventing POST (23). All the above studies showed reduced incidence and severity of POST with ketamine used by any route and the findings were consistent with the present study results.

Rajan S et al., compared the effect of nebulisation with ketamine 50 mg, MgSO4 250 mg, MgSO4 500 mg and NS on attenuating POST, hoarseness of voice and cough in patients undergoing elective abdominal and lower limb surgeries under combined epidural and general anaesthesia (15). They found a statistically significant decrease in POST at 0, 2, and 4 hour, and postoperative hoarseness at 0 hour with ketamine 50 mg and magnesium sulfate 500 mg. In addition to this, the incidence and severity of sore throat and hoarseness of voice were effectively reduced in the study groups. Although, there was a decrease in the incidence of cough in all the study groups at 0, 2, and 4 hour, but not statistically significant. However, there was no incidence of cough at 12 and 24 hours postextubation in all the four groups. In contrary to this, in the present study the incidence of postoperative cough was significantly reduced in both groups upto 6 hours. Rajkumar G et al., found a significant reduction in hoarseness of voice only at 24 hours, but there was reduction in incidence of it at 0, 2 and 4 hours following ketamine gargle (24). However, hoarseness of voice was absent in ketamine group after 2 hours postextubation in the present study.

Limitation(s)

The main limitation of the study was serum levels of ketamine were not measured. Experience of anaesthesiologist who did the intubation and the number of attempts were not considered. Further studies need to be carried out to prove and strengthen the role of ketamine nebulisation in reducing POST.

Conclusion

Preoperative ketamine nebulisation was found to be effective in reducing both the incidence and severity of POST, hoarseness of voice and cough after general anaesthesia with endotracheal intubation.

References

1.
McHardy FE, Chung F. Postoperative sore throat: Cause, prevention and treatment. Anaesthesia. 1999;54(5):444-53. [crossref] [PubMed]
2.
Higgins PP, Chung F, Mezei G. Postoperative sore throat after ambulatory surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2002;88(4):582-84. [crossref] [PubMed]
3.
Loeser EA, Bennett GM, Orr DL, Stanley TH. Reduction of postoperative sore throat with new endotracheal tube cuffs. Anesthesiology. 1980;52:257-59. [crossref] [PubMed]
4.
Stout DM, Bishop MJ, Dwersteg JF, Cullen BF. Correlation of endotracheal tube size with sore throat and hoarseness following general anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1987;67(3):419-21. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Biro P, Seifert B, Pasch T. Complaints of sore throat after tracheal intubation: A prospective evaluation. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2005;22(4):307-11. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
Hari Kumar S, Saravanan D, Ranganathan S, Sumathi K. Postoperative sore throat-Incidence and contributory factors. Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical sciences. 2013;26(26):286-92.
7.
Al-Qahtani AS, Messahel FM. Quality improvement in anesthetic practice-incidence of sore throat after using small tracheal tube. Middle East J Anesthesiol. 2005;18(1):179-83.
8.
Carlton SM, Coggeshall RE. Inflammation-induced changes in peripheral glutamate receptor populations. Brain Res. 1999;820:63-70. [crossref]
9.
Carlton SM, Zhou S, Coggeshall RE. Evidence for the interaction of glutamate and NK1 receptors in the periphery. Brain Res. 1998;790:160-69. [crossref]
10.
Davidson EM, Carlton SM. Intraplanter injection of dextrorphan, Ketamine or memantine attenuates formalin- induced behaviors. Brain Res. 1998;785(1):136-42. [crossref]
11.
Zhu MM, Zhou QH, Zhu MH, Rong HB, Xu YM, Qian YN, et al. Effects of nebulised ketamine on allergen-induced airway hyperresponsiveness and inflammation in actively sensitized Brown-Norway rats. J Inflam. 2007;4(1):01-06. [crossref] [PubMed]
12.
Safavi M, Honarmand A, Fariborzifar A, Attari M. Intravenous dexamethasone versus ketamine gargle versus intravenous dexamethasone combined with ketamine gargle for evaluation of postoperative sore throat and hoarseness: A randomised, placebo-controlled, double blind clinical trial. Adv Biomed Res. 2014;20(3):212. [crossref] [PubMed]
13.
Mayhood J, Cress K. Effectiveness of ketamine gargle in reducing postoperative sore throat in patients undergoing airway instrumentation: A systematic review. JBI Evidence Synthesis. 2015;13(9):244-78. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Amingad B, Jayaram S. Comparison of ketamine nebulisation with ketamine gargle in attenuating postoperative sore throat. Indian J Clin Anaesth. 2016;3(3):347-51. [crossref]
15.
Rajan S, Malayil GJ, Varghese R, Kumar L. Comparison of usefulness of ketamine and magnesium sulfate nebulisations for attenuating postoperative sore throat, hoarseness of voice, and cough. Anesth Essays Res. 2017;11:287-93. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Ahuja V, Mitra S, Sarna R. Nebulised ketamine decreases incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat. Indian J Anaesth. 2015;59:37-42. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Thomas D, Bejoy R, Zabrin N, Beevi S. Preoperative ketamine nebulisation attenuates the incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat: A randomised controlled clinical trial. Saudi J Anaesth. 2018;12:440-45. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Reddy M, Fiaz S. Dose dependent effectiveness of ketamine nebulisation in preventing postoperative sore throat due to tracheal intubation. Sri Lankan J Anaesthesiol. 2018;26:22-27. [crossref]
19.
Aditya AK, Das B, Mishra DK. Assessment of nebulised ketamine for reductions of incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat. Int J Med Health Res. 2017;3:130-32.
20.
Mehrotra S, Kumar N, Khurana G, Bist SS. Postoperative sore throat: Incidence after nebulisation with ketamine, lidocaine and budesonide. International Journal of Medical Science and Clinical Invention. 2017;4:2994-98. [crossref]
21.
Kumar R. Relative assessment of ketamine nebulisation and ketamine gargle in attenuating postoperative sore throat. Journal of Medical Science and Clinical Research. 2017;5:25277-79. [crossref]
22.
Jain S, Barasker SK. A comparative study of preoperative ketamine and MgSO4 nebulisation for incidence of postoperative sore throat after endotracheal intubation. Int J Contemp Med Res. 2017;4:1356-59.
23.
Charan SD, Khilji MY, Jain R, Devra V, Saxena M. Inhalation of ketamine in different doses to decrease the severity of postoperative sore throat in surgeries under general anesthesia patients. Anesth Essays Res. 2018;12:625-29. [crossref] [PubMed]
24.
Rajkumar G, Eshwori L, Konyak PY, Singh LD, Singh TR, Rani MB. Prophylactic ketamine gargle to reduce postoperative sore throat following endotracheal intubation. J Med Soc. 2012;26:175-79.

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/49872.15824

Date of Submission: Apr 11, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Aug 09, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Nov 02, 2021
Date of Publishing: Jan 01, 2022

Author declaration :
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Apr 14, 2021
• Manual Googling: Oct 25, 2021
• iThenticate Software: Nov 19, 2021 (22%)

Etymology: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com