Following approval from the local ethics committee (PUA04202312313157) and registration of the study at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06266481), written informed consent was obtained from all participants after explaining the study procedures. The study, conducted from January to July 2024, focused on patients aged 18 to 50 years with an ASA physical status classification of I or II scheduled for elective shoulder arthroscopic surgery. Exclusions included individuals unwilling to consent, those with anticipated difficult airways, allergies to steroids or lidocaine, ASA classifications III or IV, uncontrolled diabetes, current steroid use, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), pregnancy, and preexisting upper respiratory conditions, end-stage renal failure, or liver failure.
The research involved 100 patients who were randomly allocated into two groups. In the dexamethasone group (Group A), intubation was performed using an endotracheal tube whose cuff had been soaked in 8 mg of dexamethasone for 10 minutes prior to the procedure.[10] In contrast, the lidocaine group (Group B) was intubated with an endotracheal tube that had been sprayed with 10% lidocaine.[11]
Preoperative assessments for all patients included medical history, demographic data, physical examination, and airway assessment. Anesthesia induction was achieved with propofol (2 mg/kg), cis-atracurium (0.2 mg/kg), and fentanyl (2 mcg/kg IV). For male patients, a 7.5 mm internal diameter pretreated tube with a high-volume/low-pressure cuff was used, while female patients were intubated with a 7.0 mm internal diameter pretreated tube according to group. Anesthesia was maintained using isoflurane (1.2–1.5 vol%), 50% O2 with air, and cisatracurium (0.03 mg/kg IV every hour). After surgery, only oral suction was performed, and endotracheal suction was avoided. Neostigmine 0.04mg/kg (2.5 mg) with atropine 0.4mg atropine per 1mg neostigmine (1 mg) was administered to reverse neuromuscular blockade, and extubation was carried out smoothly once the patient regained consciousness.[12, 13]
Patients were assessed at 1 hour and 6 hours after extubation for post-operative sore throat (POST). The severity of POST was measured using a modified 4-point scale: 0 = no sore throat, 1 = mild sore throat (complaints only when asked), 2 = moderate sore throat (spontaneous complaints), and 3 = severe sore throat (voice changes or hoarseness).[14]
Sample size:
The sample size was calculated using G Power 3.1.9.7, 2020, (t test).[15] Based on mean of sore throat severity among patients treated with similar topical corticosteroids after 24 hours of 0.1 ± 0.2, mean of sore throat severity among patients with topical lidocaine after 24 hours of 0.4 ± 0.2 [11, 16] giving an effect size of 0.6, alpha error of 0.05, power of 80%, the minimum required sample size was calculated to be 90 participants. The sample will be rounded to 100 patients (50 intubated with a dexamethasone-soaked tube and 50 intubated with a tube sprayed with 10% lidocaine).
Statistical analysis:
The collected data was wrangled, coded, and analyzed using the SPSS software (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). The quantitative variables were expressed using mean ± SD whereas the categorical variables expressed by counts (%). A chi-square test was used to estimate the difference between the categorical variables; and whenever it was not valid, monte carlo exact probability was used. Independent t test was used to estimate the relation between continuous variables. Statistical significance was considered when p<0.05.
A total of 110 patients were evaluated for eligibility, of which 10 were excluded due to difficult intubation or receiving dexamethasone IV. 100 patients were enrolled in the study and allocated into two group of 50 patients in each group, as shown in the study flow chart.(figure 1)patients demographic data and Duration of operation (Minutes) were comparable between the groups with insignificant differences.(table 1)
Table 1: Comparison of the studied groups as regard sociodemographic characteristics & duration of operation
|
Dexamethasone group
(n= 50)
|
Lidocaine
group
(n= 50)
|
Test of significance
(p)
|
Age (Years)
|
30.28 ± 5.58
|
31.94 ± 8.9
|
t= -1.112,
p= 0.269
|
Height (Cm)
|
161.2 ± 4.5
|
162.3 ± 4.6
|
t= -1.2,
p= 0.22
|
Weight (kg)
|
80.0 ± 11.2
|
76.6 ± 9.66
|
t= 1.64,
p= 0.1
|
Duration of operation (Minutes)
|
108.0 ± 13.5
|
105.9 ± 14.0
|
t= 0.76,
p= 0.44
|
Sex
|
|
|
X2= 0.04,
p= 0.84
|
|
27 (54%)
|
26 (52%)
|
|
23 (46%)
|
24 (48%)
|
Data was described by Mean ± SD,Sex described by N (%)
t; Independent t test
X2; Chi square Test
The study also assessed the degree of pain one hour post-operation in the dexamethasone and lidocaine groups. In the dexamethasone group, 50% of participants reported no pain, compared to 16% in the lidocaine group. Mild pain was reported by 30% of the dexamethasone group and 26% of the lidocaine group. Moderate pain was experienced by 18% of the dexamethasone group, whereas 52% of the lidocaine group reported moderate pain. Severe pain was reported by 2% of participants in the dexamethasone group and 6% in the lidocaine group. The mean pain score was significantly lower in the dexamethasone group (0.72 ± 0.83) compared to the lidocaine group (1.48 ± 0.84). The median pain score was also lower in the dexamethasone group (0.5, IQR 0.0 – 1.0) compared to the lidocaine group (2.0, IQR 1.0 – 2.0), with these differences being statistically significant. ( table 2,figure 2,4)
Table (2): Comparison in both groups as regards Pain degree (1hrs)
|
Dexamethasone group
(No.=50)
|
Lidocaine
group
(No.=50)
|
Test of significant
(p)
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
|
25a
|
50.0
|
8b
|
16.0
|
MCp<0.001*
|
|
15a
|
30.0
|
13a
|
26.0
|
|
9a
|
18.0
|
26b
|
52.0
|
|
1a
|
2.0
|
3a
|
6.0
|
Mean ± SD
|
0.72 ± 0.83
|
1.48 ± 0.84
|
t= -4.543,
p<0.001*
|
Median (IQR)
|
0.5 (0.0 – 1.0)
|
2.0 (1.0 – 2.0)
|
MCp; Monte Carlo Exact probability
*;Statistically significant (p<0.05)
a, b ;Different letters indicates significant difference between column proportion
The study further compared the degree of pain six hours post-operation between the dexamethasone and lidocaine groups. In the dexamethasone group, 64% of participants reported no pain, compared to 44% in the lidocaine group. Mild pain was experienced by 30% of the dexamethasone group and 42% of the lidocaine group. Moderate pain was reported by 6% of the dexamethasone group, whereas 12% of the lidocaine group experienced moderate pain. Only 2% of participants in the lidocaine group reported severe pain, while no severe pain was reported in the dexamethasone group. The mean pain score was significantly lower in the dexamethasone group (0.42 ± 0.61) compared to the lidocaine group (0.72 ± 0.76). The median pain score was also lower in the dexamethasone group (0.0, IQR 0.0 – 1.0) compared to the lidocaine group (1.0, IQR 0.0 – 1.0), with these differences being statistically significant. (table 3,figure 3,4)
Table (3): Comparison in both groups as regards Pain degree (6hrs)
|
Dexamethasone group
(N= 50)
|
Lidocaine
group
(N= 50)
|
Test of significant
(p)
|
No.
|
%
|
No.
|
%
|
|
32
|
64.0
|
22
|
44.0
|
MCp= 0.145
|
|
15
|
30.0
|
21
|
42.0
|
|
3
|
6.0
|
6
|
12.0
|
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
2.0
|
Mean ± SD
|
0.42 ± 0.61
|
0.72 ± 0.76
|
t= -2.183,
p= 0.031*
|
Median (IQR)
|
0.0 (0.0 – 1.0)
|
1.0 (0.0 – 1.0)
|
MCp; Monte Carlo test