Korean J Anesthesiol.  2014 Feb;66(2):105-111. 10.4097/kjae.2014.66.2.105.

A comparative study among normal saline, water soluble gel and 2% lidocaine gel as a SLIPA lubricant

• Park PG
• Choi GJ
• Kim WJ
• Yang SY
• Shin HY
• Kang H
• Baek CW
• Jung YH
• Kim JY
• Kang MS

• KMID: 2092429
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2014.66.2.105

Abstract

BACKGROUND
This study was designed to find appropriate lubricant for streamed lined liner of pharyngeal airway(TM) (SLIPA(TM)). We evaluated the incidence of sore throat, nausea, vomiting, hoarseness, paresthesia and blood stain after using saline, water soluble gel and 2% lidocaine gel as a SLIPA(TM) lublicant.
METHODS
One hundred twenty three patients scheduled for minor surgery to whom the SLIPA(TM) was considered suitable were randomly allocated to one of three groups which receive normal saline, water soluble gel or 2% lidocaine gel as a SLIPA(TM) lublicant. Patients were interviewed at recovery room, post operation 6-12 hour, post operation 18-24 hour about sore throat and other complications.
RESULTS
There were no statistical difference in sore throat and blood stain among three groups. Also there were no statistical differences in hoarseness, nausea, vomiting. The incidence of paresthesia in 2% lidocaine gel group was significantly higher than those of the other two groups immediately after operation, but it was resolved after leaving the recovery room.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggest that normal saline, water soluble gel and 2% lidocaine gel are all available as a SLIPA(TM) lubricant. Size of SLIPA(TM), insertion technique and difficulty of insertion should be further investigated as the main causes of a sore throat and other complications which can occur after the insertion of SLIPA(TM).

Keyword

Lubricant; SLIPA; Sore throat

MeSH Terms

Blood Stains
Hoarseness
Humans
Incidence
Lidocaine*
Nausea
Paresthesia
Pharyngitis
Recovery Room
Rivers
Surgical Procedures, Minor
Vomiting
Lidocaine