Endotracheal Tube Size and Post-Operative Sore Throat in Women

Authors

  • Mehar Ali
  • Anil Kumar
  • Kelash Kumar
  • Syed Farjad Sultan
  • Mubarak Shah
  • Sandeep Kumar

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs22162118

Keywords:

Endotracheal intubation, Sore throat, Hoarseness, Postoperative complications, Elective surgery

Abstract

Aim: To determine the proportion of women with postoperative sore throat an hour after elective surgery in women intubated with a size 6 endotracheal tube versus size 7 endotracheal tube.
Study design: Randomized controlled trial
Place and duration of study: Department of Anesthesiology, The Indus Hospital, Karachi from 22-09-2016 to 2109-2017.
Methodology: Patients were divided two equal groups through randomization i.e. endotracheal tube size 6 versus endotracheal tube size 7. Prior to intubation the endotracheal tube is to be lubricated with normal saline. In group ETT 6, trachea intubated with a high volume low pressure endotracheal tube with internal diameter 6.0 and in group ETT 7 with a 7.0 diameter tube respectively. Immediately after intubation the endotracheal tube was verified by a five-point auscultation technique and the cuff inflated with room air until no air leakage could be heard. No humidifiers or moisture exchangers were used.
Results: The mean age of ETT 6 and ETT 7 group was 34.36±9.46 and37.34±10.96 years respectively. The mean duration of surgery in ETT 6 and ETT 7 group was 117.70±30.57 and 125.17±55.0 minutes respectively. When both groups were postoperative sore throat was noted in 38 (59.4%) in ETT 6 group whereas 62 (96.9%) noted in ETT7 group (p=0.0001).
Conclusion: Highly significant difference was found in postoperative sore throat between the group endotracheal tube size 6 in comparison to the group endotracheal tube size 7.

Downloads

How to Cite

Ali, M. ., Kumar, A. ., Kumar, K. ., Farjad Sultan, S. ., Shah, M. ., & Kumar, S. . (2022). Endotracheal Tube Size and Post-Operative Sore Throat in Women. Pakistan Journal of Medical & Health Sciences, 16(02), 118. https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs22162118