Objective: This study aimed to assess and compare the effects of intranasal administration of lidocaine and remifentanil on the condition of LMA insertion and cardiovascular response.
Methods: From March 2019 to March 2020, this double-blind randomized clinical trial study was conducted on 60 patients, who underwent general anesthesia with LMA insertion at Faiz Hospital, Isfahan, Iran. After induction of anesthesia and before placing the laryngeal mask, the first group received remifentanil 1 μg/Kg, the second group received lidocaine 2% 1 mg/Kg, and the third group received normal saline with the same volume intranasally. The conditions of LMA insertion and hemodynamic changes that occurred during its insertion were investigated.
Results: In terms of demographics characteristics (p>0.05), success in placing the LMA on the first try (p=0.73), number of attempts to insert LMA (p=0.61), performance of LMA (p=0.73), need for additional propofol (p=0.53), frequency of gagging (p=0.53), cough (p=0.15) p), and laryngospasm (p=0.99) did not differ significantly. In the remifentanil group, the cardiovascular response to LMA injection was less than that of the lidocaine group. Moreover, both groups were lower than the saline group, but no significant difference was observed.
Conclusion: In facilitating LMA insertion, the effect of intranasal remifentanil was comparable to intranasal lidocaine. Intranasal remifentanil was somewhat more effective than intranasal lidocaine in weakening the cardiovascular response to LMA insertion, but it did not outperform lidocaine.
Keywords: Hemodynamics; Intranasal; Laryngeal mask airway; Lidocaine; Remifentanil.