Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study

Topical anesthesia of the upper airway is often recommended when difficulty in airway management is anticipated. There are published reports, however, of administration of topical anesthesia resulting in complete loss of airway control. Adverse effects are mostly attributed to interference with invo...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Anesthesia and analgesia 2012-04, Vol.114 (4), p.785-790
Hauptverfasser: Maxwell, Melanie J., English, James D., Moppett, Iain K., McGlashan, Julian A., Norris, Andrew M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 790
container_issue 4
container_start_page 785
container_title Anesthesia and analgesia
container_volume 114
creator Maxwell, Melanie J.
English, James D.
Moppett, Iain K.
McGlashan, Julian A.
Norris, Andrew M.
description Topical anesthesia of the upper airway is often recommended when difficulty in airway management is anticipated. There are published reports, however, of administration of topical anesthesia resulting in complete loss of airway control. Adverse effects are mostly attributed to interference with involuntary protective airway reflexes, while gross motor function itself generally is thought to be preserved. We hypothesized that if motor control is affected, measurable quantitative changes in vocalization should follow the use of topical anesthesia. A prospective, crossover, randomized, double-blind study was conducted, in which 24 healthy volunteers each performed 2 vocal exercises, while having their glottic appearance recorded digitally via fiberoptic nasendoscopy. Subjects gargled with 3 test solutions on separate occasions (placebo, 2% lidocaine, and 4% lidocaine) and repeated the vocal exercises and nasendoscopy. The angle between the vocal cords was measured using MB-Ruler®, and the Laryngograph Speech Studio® software was used for vocal parameter analysis. The only significant changes in voice quality occurred between the control and test groups (P = 0.014). No difference could be found between the placebo and lidocaine groups. Although gargling with local anesthetic affected vocalization, no pharmacological effect attributable to local anesthetic was observed.
doi_str_mv 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182455b71
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_934275260</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>934275260</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3308-dcef37ccb89449ee4344077ece93b6cfb805967a713b3ffb763057a75425de1e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkd1u1DAQhS0EokvhDRDyDeJmU_yXH3MXlgUqraCCltvIdiZdgzdO7aTV9ol4TBztQiUsS9aRv5mjmYPQS0rOKKP8bf1lfUY0oRw4rZjIc13SR2hBc1ZkZS6rx2hBCOEZk1KeoGcx_kySkqp4ik4Y41QUkizQ7x_eKGfv1Wh9j-sYId0W6z1eOzBj8E6FfX_tr4Matnt8HvFVr7oufR2oSz_Y1ABvbJsa2R5w3UMctxCteodrfBF8HBJtb2GJV0lEfwthib-pvvU7ew_tEn_wk3aQvXe2b_GFUwa0z1a-n91dsvk-Tu3-OXrSKRfhxfE9RVcf15erz9nm66fzVb3JDOekyloDHS-N0ZUUQgIILgQpSzAguS5MpyuSy6JUJeWad50uC07yJHPB8hYo8FP05tB3CP5mSqM0OxsNOKd68FNsJBesTDsmiRQH0sxjBeiaIdhdWldDSTNH1KSImv8jSmWvjgaT3kH7r-hvJgl4fQRUTKvtguqNjQ9cXsiKcvbgf-fdCCH-ctMdhGYLyo3bhswn5zJjhDIiksjm_Cv-Bzg8rL8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>934275260</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid LWW Legacy Archive</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Maxwell, Melanie J. ; English, James D. ; Moppett, Iain K. ; McGlashan, Julian A. ; Norris, Andrew M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Maxwell, Melanie J. ; English, James D. ; Moppett, Iain K. ; McGlashan, Julian A. ; Norris, Andrew M.</creatorcontrib><description>Topical anesthesia of the upper airway is often recommended when difficulty in airway management is anticipated. There are published reports, however, of administration of topical anesthesia resulting in complete loss of airway control. Adverse effects are mostly attributed to interference with involuntary protective airway reflexes, while gross motor function itself generally is thought to be preserved. We hypothesized that if motor control is affected, measurable quantitative changes in vocalization should follow the use of topical anesthesia. A prospective, crossover, randomized, double-blind study was conducted, in which 24 healthy volunteers each performed 2 vocal exercises, while having their glottic appearance recorded digitally via fiberoptic nasendoscopy. Subjects gargled with 3 test solutions on separate occasions (placebo, 2% lidocaine, and 4% lidocaine) and repeated the vocal exercises and nasendoscopy. The angle between the vocal cords was measured using MB-Ruler®, and the Laryngograph Speech Studio® software was used for vocal parameter analysis. The only significant changes in voice quality occurred between the control and test groups (P = 0.014). No difference could be found between the placebo and lidocaine groups. Although gargling with local anesthetic affected vocalization, no pharmacological effect attributable to local anesthetic was observed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-2999</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-7598</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182455b71</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22314690</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AACRAT</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hagerstown, MD: International Anesthesia Research Society</publisher><subject>Anesthesia ; Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy ; Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cross-Over Studies ; Double-Blind Method ; Humans ; Larynx - drug effects ; Larynx - physiology ; Lidocaine - adverse effects ; Medical sciences ; Prospective Studies ; Reflex - drug effects ; Reflex - physiology ; Voice - drug effects</subject><ispartof>Anesthesia and analgesia, 2012-04, Vol.114 (4), p.785-790</ispartof><rights>International Anesthesia Research Society</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf><![CDATA[$$Uhttp://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&PDF=y&D=ovft&AN=00000539-201204000-00018$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwolterskluwer$$H]]></linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&amp;NEWS=n&amp;CSC=Y&amp;PAGE=fulltext&amp;D=ovft&amp;AN=00000539-201204000-00018$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwolterskluwer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,4609,27924,27925,64666,65461</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=25698132$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22314690$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Maxwell, Melanie J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>English, James D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moppett, Iain K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGlashan, Julian A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Norris, Andrew M.</creatorcontrib><title>Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study</title><title>Anesthesia and analgesia</title><addtitle>Anesth Analg</addtitle><description>Topical anesthesia of the upper airway is often recommended when difficulty in airway management is anticipated. There are published reports, however, of administration of topical anesthesia resulting in complete loss of airway control. Adverse effects are mostly attributed to interference with involuntary protective airway reflexes, while gross motor function itself generally is thought to be preserved. We hypothesized that if motor control is affected, measurable quantitative changes in vocalization should follow the use of topical anesthesia. A prospective, crossover, randomized, double-blind study was conducted, in which 24 healthy volunteers each performed 2 vocal exercises, while having their glottic appearance recorded digitally via fiberoptic nasendoscopy. Subjects gargled with 3 test solutions on separate occasions (placebo, 2% lidocaine, and 4% lidocaine) and repeated the vocal exercises and nasendoscopy. The angle between the vocal cords was measured using MB-Ruler®, and the Laryngograph Speech Studio® software was used for vocal parameter analysis. The only significant changes in voice quality occurred between the control and test groups (P = 0.014). No difference could be found between the placebo and lidocaine groups. Although gargling with local anesthetic affected vocalization, no pharmacological effect attributable to local anesthetic was observed.</description><subject>Anesthesia</subject><subject>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</subject><subject>Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cross-Over Studies</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Larynx - drug effects</subject><subject>Larynx - physiology</subject><subject>Lidocaine - adverse effects</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Reflex - drug effects</subject><subject>Reflex - physiology</subject><subject>Voice - drug effects</subject><issn>0003-2999</issn><issn>1526-7598</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkd1u1DAQhS0EokvhDRDyDeJmU_yXH3MXlgUqraCCltvIdiZdgzdO7aTV9ol4TBztQiUsS9aRv5mjmYPQS0rOKKP8bf1lfUY0oRw4rZjIc13SR2hBc1ZkZS6rx2hBCOEZk1KeoGcx_kySkqp4ik4Y41QUkizQ7x_eKGfv1Wh9j-sYId0W6z1eOzBj8E6FfX_tr4Matnt8HvFVr7oufR2oSz_Y1ABvbJsa2R5w3UMctxCteodrfBF8HBJtb2GJV0lEfwthib-pvvU7ew_tEn_wk3aQvXe2b_GFUwa0z1a-n91dsvk-Tu3-OXrSKRfhxfE9RVcf15erz9nm66fzVb3JDOekyloDHS-N0ZUUQgIILgQpSzAguS5MpyuSy6JUJeWad50uC07yJHPB8hYo8FP05tB3CP5mSqM0OxsNOKd68FNsJBesTDsmiRQH0sxjBeiaIdhdWldDSTNH1KSImv8jSmWvjgaT3kH7r-hvJgl4fQRUTKvtguqNjQ9cXsiKcvbgf-fdCCH-ctMdhGYLyo3bhswn5zJjhDIiksjm_Cv-Bzg8rL8</recordid><startdate>20120401</startdate><enddate>20120401</enddate><creator>Maxwell, Melanie J.</creator><creator>English, James D.</creator><creator>Moppett, Iain K.</creator><creator>McGlashan, Julian A.</creator><creator>Norris, Andrew M.</creator><general>International Anesthesia Research Society</general><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120401</creationdate><title>Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study</title><author>Maxwell, Melanie J. ; English, James D. ; Moppett, Iain K. ; McGlashan, Julian A. ; Norris, Andrew M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3308-dcef37ccb89449ee4344077ece93b6cfb805967a713b3ffb763057a75425de1e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Anesthesia</topic><topic>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</topic><topic>Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cross-Over Studies</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Larynx - drug effects</topic><topic>Larynx - physiology</topic><topic>Lidocaine - adverse effects</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Reflex - drug effects</topic><topic>Reflex - physiology</topic><topic>Voice - drug effects</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Maxwell, Melanie J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>English, James D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moppett, Iain K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGlashan, Julian A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Norris, Andrew M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Anesthesia and analgesia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Maxwell, Melanie J.</au><au>English, James D.</au><au>Moppett, Iain K.</au><au>McGlashan, Julian A.</au><au>Norris, Andrew M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study</atitle><jtitle>Anesthesia and analgesia</jtitle><addtitle>Anesth Analg</addtitle><date>2012-04-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>114</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>785</spage><epage>790</epage><pages>785-790</pages><issn>0003-2999</issn><eissn>1526-7598</eissn><coden>AACRAT</coden><abstract>Topical anesthesia of the upper airway is often recommended when difficulty in airway management is anticipated. There are published reports, however, of administration of topical anesthesia resulting in complete loss of airway control. Adverse effects are mostly attributed to interference with involuntary protective airway reflexes, while gross motor function itself generally is thought to be preserved. We hypothesized that if motor control is affected, measurable quantitative changes in vocalization should follow the use of topical anesthesia. A prospective, crossover, randomized, double-blind study was conducted, in which 24 healthy volunteers each performed 2 vocal exercises, while having their glottic appearance recorded digitally via fiberoptic nasendoscopy. Subjects gargled with 3 test solutions on separate occasions (placebo, 2% lidocaine, and 4% lidocaine) and repeated the vocal exercises and nasendoscopy. The angle between the vocal cords was measured using MB-Ruler®, and the Laryngograph Speech Studio® software was used for vocal parameter analysis. The only significant changes in voice quality occurred between the control and test groups (P = 0.014). No difference could be found between the placebo and lidocaine groups. Although gargling with local anesthetic affected vocalization, no pharmacological effect attributable to local anesthetic was observed.</abstract><cop>Hagerstown, MD</cop><pub>International Anesthesia Research Society</pub><pmid>22314690</pmid><doi>10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182455b71</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-2999
ispartof Anesthesia and analgesia, 2012-04, Vol.114 (4), p.785-790
issn 0003-2999
1526-7598
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_934275260
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid LWW Legacy Archive; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Anesthesia
Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy
Anesthetics, Local - adverse effects
Biological and medical sciences
Cross-Over Studies
Double-Blind Method
Humans
Larynx - drug effects
Larynx - physiology
Lidocaine - adverse effects
Medical sciences
Prospective Studies
Reflex - drug effects
Reflex - physiology
Voice - drug effects
title Vocalization Assessed by Electrolaryngography Is Unaffected by Topical Lidocaine Anesthesia: A Prospective, Crossover, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T14%3A43%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Vocalization%20Assessed%20by%20Electrolaryngography%20Is%20Unaffected%20by%20Topical%20Lidocaine%20Anesthesia:%20A%20Prospective,%20Crossover,%20Randomized,%20Double-Blind%20Placebo-Controlled%20Study&rft.jtitle=Anesthesia%20and%20analgesia&rft.au=Maxwell,%20Melanie%20J.&rft.date=2012-04-01&rft.volume=114&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=785&rft.epage=790&rft.pages=785-790&rft.issn=0003-2999&rft.eissn=1526-7598&rft.coden=AACRAT&rft_id=info:doi/10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182455b71&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E934275260%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=934275260&rft_id=info:pmid/22314690&rfr_iscdi=true