Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 137029

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : July | Volume : 16 | Issue : 7 | Page : UC64 - UC68 Full Version

Redefining the Role of Ketamine for Topicalisation and its Comparison with the Legend Lignocaine for Oesophagogastroduodenoscopies- A Randomised Clinical Study


Published: July 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/55049.16671
Bhumika Pathak, Nirali Panchal, Sunny R Mevcha, Madhavi Chaudhari

1. Associate Professor, Department of Anaesthesia, Pramukhswami Medical College, Anand, Gujarat, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Anaesthesia, Pramukhswami Medical College, Anand, Gujarat, India. 3. Resident, Department of Anaesthesia, Pramukhswami Medical College, Anand, Gujarat, India. 4. Professor and Head, Department of Anaesthesia, Pramukhswami Medical College, Anand, Gujarat, India.

Correspondence Address :
Bhumika Pathak,
Shree Krishna Hospital, Anand, Gujarat, India.
E-mail: docbhum30@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Endoscopy is a minimally invasive procedure for visualisation of gastrointestinal tract performed under topicalisation with or without sedation. Lignocaine is one of the most popular local anaesthetic used for topicalisation for endotracheal intubation in different forms like spray, gargles, nebulisation, gel. Recently ketamine has emerged as an effective antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory agent.

Aim: To observe and compare the effect of ketamine and lignocaine gargles for decreasing sore throat, coughing and change in voice. Also to observe various side-effects following use of ketamine and lignocaine.

Materials and Methods: This prospective double-blind randomised clinical trial was conducted at Shree Krishna Hospital, Karamsad, Gujarat, India, from January 2020 to June 2021. Total 70 patients undergoing oesophagogastroduodenoscopies under sedation were included in the study. They were divided into two groups i.e, 35 patients in each group. Group L received lignocaine 2% viscous gargles 3 mg/kg and group K received ketamine gargles 3 mg/kg ideal body weight diluted in Normal Saline (NS) up to total 30 mL. Sore throat, coughing, change in voice, side-effects were observed. Student’s t-test was used for continuous data.

Results: In group L, 11.4% of patients and in group K 22.9% of patients complained of mild sore throat (grade 1) immediate postprocedure but this was statistically insignificant (p-value=0.2). For both the groups, grade 1 coughing was observed in 2.9% patients (p-value >0.995). In both the groups 5.71% of patients complained about change of voice, statistically insignificant (p-value >0.995). Vomiting was observed as a side-effect in 2.9% of patients in both the groups but there were no other side-effects.

Conclusion: Gargling with ketamine was as effective as lignocaine for prevention of sore throat, coughing and change in voice in patients undergoing oesophagogastroduodenoscopies and thus improved patient compliance.

Keywords

Change in voice, Cough, Sore throat

Oesophagogastroduodenoscopies have gained popularity over a period of time for various diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for gastrointestinal diseases (1),(2). They are advantageous over conventional open techniques as they enable direct visualisation of disease, avoidance of incision, less surgical manipulation, less painful and less hospital stay (3). In comparison to conventional technique, they are less invasive but unpleasant procedures. During oesophagogastroduodenoscopies, endoscope is passed through upper gastrointestinal tract which causes tissue trauma and inflammation which leads to coughing, sore throat and sometimes change in voice particularly when the topicalisation of the oropharynx is inadequate (4),(5). These side-effects lead to discomfort, pain and patient dissatisfaction (6). Hence to prevent these side-effects topicalisation of oropharynx is mandatory which can be done with nebulisation (lignocaine 4%, steroids), lignocaine spray 10%, gargles of viscous lignocaine 2% and ketamine gargles (7). Among all topicalisation techniques, gargling is simple, easily available, provides topical effect, better tolerated by patient and cost effective. Both lignocaine and ketamine can be used for gargles because they have a topical effect on oral mucosa and hence, prevent postoperative side-effects like sore throat, coughing and change in voice (8).

Lignocaine is a local anaesthetic drug which when used for gargles, spray or nebulisation have topical anaesthetic effect over oral cavity, oropharynx, hypo pharynx and provides short duration of analgesia (9). Most of the times these methods of or pharyngotracheal topical anaesthesia have been used for endotracheal intubation and laryngeal mask airway insertion (7),(8).

Ketamine is well versed with its antinociceptive action since its introduction in an anaesthesia practice but anti-inflammatory action of ketamine has picked up stream very recently (10). Ketamine is glutamate antagonist and agonist at opioid receptors located in oral and upper respiratory tract mucosa which provides analgesia and reduces postoperative sore throat (11). Ketamine acts at different levels of inflammation and reduces cytokine production and regulates inflammatory mediators, hence provides anti-inflammatory action. When ketamine is used as gargles, it has antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory effect on oropharynx and hypopharynx (12). This property of ketamine is been used for treatment of various diseases like mood disorder, major depression, bipolar disorder (13),(14). Lignocaine is been used for topicalisation since quite a long time but its efficacy is very sparsely compared with ketamine (15). So, the primary objective of this study was to compare the effect of ketamine gargles and lignocaine gargles for prevention of sore throat, coughing and change in voice for patients undergoing oesophagogastroduodenoscopies under sedation and secondary objective was to observe the side-effects like vomiting, hypertension or hypotension, arrhythmias, hypoxia, convulsion.

Material and Methods

This prospective double-blind randomised clinical trial was conducted at Shree Krishna Hospital, Karamsad, Gujarat, India, from January 2020 to June 2021. This study was commenced after obtaining approval from Hospital Ethics Committee (IEC/HMPCMCE/122/FACULTY/10/191/20). CTRI registration (CTRI/2020/10/028411) and written and informed consent from all the study participants were obtained.

Inclusion and Exclusion criteria: Patients of either gender, American Society of Anaesthesiologist (ASA) grade I, II and III physical status, aged 18-60 years posted for oesophagogastroduodenoscopies under sedation were included in this study. Patients who refused to give consent, unco-operative patients, history of preoperative sore throat, asthma, upper respiratory tract infection, history of allergy to study drugs, anticipated difficult airway and intubated patients were excluded from study.

Sample size calculation: By considering incidence of sore throat as main outcome and based on the study by Dhanger S et al., it was evident that incidence of sore throat was almost zero using lignocaine gargle (8). Thus, in this study, 70 participants were enrolled (35 in each group) to detect a 20% difference in incidence of sore throat for achieving 80% power allowing 5% type I error. Patients were allotted randomly into two groups using WINPEPI software and by using the opaque envelope method.

Patients were kept nil per oral 8 hours for solids and 6 hours for liquids. Preoperative intravenous cannula was secured and vitals like heart rate, blood pressure and pulse oximetry were noted and recorded in the case protocol. Gargles were given according to the group allotted.

• Group K (n=35): Ketamine gargles, 3 mg/kg ideal body weight diluted in Normal Saline (NS) upto total 30 mL.

• Group L (n=35): Lignocaine 2% viscous gargles, 3 mg/kg NS ideal body weight diluted in NS upto total 30 mL.

Study Procedure

Patients were asked to gargle for 60 seconds. Anaesthesia was given after 10 minutes of gargles. After shifting the patient to Operation Theatre patients were monitored with electrocardiogram, non invasive blood pressure, pulse oximetry, end tidal carbon dioxide monitoring with nasal cannula. Oxygen was started with nasal prongs. Patients were positioned in lateral position with mouth piece in situ. Induction sequence included intravenous (i.v.) fentanyl 2 mcg/kg and i.v. propofol 2 mg/kg and spontaneous respiration was maintained. After loss of eyelash reflex, patients were handed over to surgeon for endoscopic procedure. Additional dose of intravenous propanol was given if required till completion of the procedure. After completion of endoscopy, oral suctioning was done. Once patients were fully awake and were following verbal commands, they were shifted to recovery room and assessed for sore throat, coughing and change in voice by 4 point scale at 0,1,4 and 24 hours after the completion of procedure (12).

Four point scale for sore throat:

0: No sore throat,

1: Mild-Complained of sore throat only on asking,

2: Moderate-Complained of sore throat on his/her own,

3: Severe-Change of voice or hoarseness associated with throat pain

Four point scale for coughing:

0: No cough,

1: Mild-Less than what is seen in common cold,

2: Moderate-Like what is seen in common cold,

3: Severe-More than what is seen in common cold.

Four point scale for change of voice:

0: No hoarseness,

1: Mild- No hoarseness at the time of interview but had previously

2: Moderate- Only felt by patient at the time of interview,

3: Severe- Recognisable at the time of interview.

In both the groups patients were also observed for side-effects like vomiting, hypertension or hypotension, arrhythmias, hypoxia, convulsion.

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics, mean±SD, frequency (%), was used to present the profile of study participants (age, gender, weight, ASA grading, duration of procedure). Student’s t-test was used for continuous data. Test of difference between Proportions/Chi-square tests was performed to check whether the incidence of sore throat, cough and change in voice were statistically significant in group K versus group L and p-values for all parameters were derived. The analysis was performed using STATA (14.2) version.

Results

Out of 80 patients, 70 patients were analysed and five patients in each group were excluded from the analysis. In group L, four patients and in group K, five patients were excluded from analysis as in these patients procedure was abandoned due to unforeseen surgical complications like large growth; large varices with high risk of bleeding and inability to negotiate endoscope due to stricture. In group L, one patient was intubated in view of variceal bleeding and excluded from the analysis (Table/Fig 1). In this study, demographic data such as age, gender, weight, ASA status, duration of procedure were comparable between the groups (Table/Fig 2).

In this study, incidence of sore throat at 0 hour was 4 (11.4%) in group L and 8 (22.9%) in group K. Severity of sore throat was grade 1 (mild) in both the groups. The incidence as well as severity was statistically insignificant in both the groups (p-value=0.2) (Table/Fig 3). In both the groups, 2.9% of patients complained of mild coughing (grade 1) at 0 hour, which was statistically insignificant (p-value >0.995) (Table/Fig 4). Incidence of change of voice (grade 1) was 2 (5.71%) in both the groups at 1 hour which was also statistically insignificant as p-value >0.995 (Table/Fig 5). None of the patients complained of sore throat, coughing and change in voice beyond one hour in both the groups. Severity of sore throat, coughing and change in voice was also mild (grade 1) in both the groups. The only side-effect observed was vomiting in 2.9% of patients in both the groups and none of the other adverse effects were observed (Table/Fig 6).

Discussion

Oesophagogastroduodenoscopies are less invasive, less time consuming and offers less morbidity to the patients that is why they are preferred over conventional technique. They can be performed as day care procedure, so they provide better patient compliance and enhances recovery after surgery (3),(4). Though they have some disadvantages like postprocedure aspiration, bleeding, perforation and they can not be used in unstable patients, patients with coagulopathy, still they are well versed technique for most of the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures of upper gastrointestinal tract (5).

When endoscope is passed through upper gastrointestinal tract, it causes discomfort, activates gag reflex, causes localised tissue trauma which leads to release of inflammatory markers (Interleukins, interferons, cyclooxygenase and tumour necrosis factor-alpha) which causes coughing, postoperative sore throat and sometimes change in voice (16). Various studies have been performed to study the effect of ketamine and lignocaine gargles for prevention of sore throat in endotracheal intubation or laryngeal mask airway insertion but till now none of the studies were performed to prevent sore throat in patients posted for oesophagogastroduodenoscopies (6),(7),(8),(16),(17),(18),(19),(20),(21),(22). There are various factors which can affect the incidence of sore throat like age, gender, duration of surgery (16),(17). But in present study both the groups were comparable in terms of demographic profile and results of this study were in accordance with the study performed by Kamble NP and Gajbhare MN (16).

In the study performed by Dhanger S et al., incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat was compared using 4-point scale in patients undergoing Laryngeal Mask Airway insertion under general anaesthesia. They concluded that incidence as well as severity of postoperative sore throat were significantly less in the lignocaine group (17.5% grade 1) in comparison to ketamine group (15% grade 2 and 25% grade 1) (8). This incidence of postoperative sore throat in their study was comparable to present study (group L 11.4% and group K 22.9%) but severity of sore throat was less in present study as all the patients in both the groups were having only grade 1(mild) sore throat. Also the incidence of sore throat was limited to immediate postoperative period (only at 0 hour) in both the groups.

Kamble NP et al., studied the effect of ketamine gargles 50 mg in 29 mL distilled water and placebo with 30 mL distilled water in 60 patients undergoing endotracheal intubation for surgeries. They concluded that incidence of sore throat was significantly less in ketamine group (66.7%, 46.7%, 23.3%, 13.3% at 0, 4, 8 and 24 hour postsurgery) compared to placebo group (90%, 86.7%, 66.7%, 50%) (16). Results of their study were consistent with present study in terms of both severity and incidence of postoperative sore throat in ketamine gargle group. Ketamine is an N-Methyl D-Aspartate receptor antagonist and is involved in pain pathway and anti-inflammatory pathway. Ketamine diminishes the production of various inflammatory markers like cytokines, interleukins, tumour necrosis factor-alpha and gamma-interferon when given before or after proinflammatory insult and thus helps in reducing inflammation and complication related to it like sore throat [13,16]. Similarly in different studies performed by Rabbani MW et al., (6) Shetty SR et al., (19), Kudva S and Hegde R, (21) Altiparmak B and Turan M (20) incidence of sore throat varied from 13% to 60% in Ketamine group and 20-90% in placebo group.

Kumar MS et al., in their study observed and compared the effect of ketamine gargles (40 mg), aspirin gargles (350 mg) and 10% lignocaine spray in reducing the incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat, coughing and change in voice in patients undergoing endotracheal intubation. In their study incidence of coughing was 20% in group L, 14% in group K and 10% in group A after 2 hours postestuation, grade 1 coughing in 4% of patients at the end of 24 hours in group L and group K, grade 3 change in voice in 6% patients in group L and grade 2 change of voice in 4% of patients in group K at the end of 4 hours (18). In the present study incidence of mild coughing (grade 1) was 2.9% in both the groups which was limited to immediate postprocedure period. Incidence of change in voice was also 5.71% (grade 1) in both the groups. In comparison to present study incidence and severity of coughing and change in voice were higher in study performed by Kumar MS et al., (18). They used a fixed dose of ketamine (40 mg) and three puffs of 10% lignocaine spray for their study whereas in present study, a flexible dose (3 mg/kg ideal body weight) of ketamine and lignocaine had been used. This could be a likely cause for reduced incidence and severity of coughing and change in voice in present study. Lalwani J et al., had found higher incidence of coughing and change in voice than present study. They also used fixed dose of ketamine (50 mg) which could be a cause of this discrepancy in results (12).

In the present study patients were also observed for side-effects. Incidence of vomiting was 2.9% in both the groups immediate post-procedure but there were no other side-effects noted. None of the other studies have observed these side-effects. (Table/Fig 7) is showing the comparison of results of different study (6),(8),(12),(16),(18),(19),(20),(21).

Limitation(s)

In the present study, instead of using subjective method for patient’s and surgeon’s satisfaction, objective scoring system could be used and their statistical analysis could be included.

Conclusion

Oesophagogastroduodenoscopies are the future of microsurgery. Using topical anaesthesia with sedation makes it an agreeable experience for both, patients as well as surgeons. From this study it was observed that both ketamine and lignocaine gargles were having promising results for reducing the incidence of sore throat, coughing and change in voice without evident side-effects in oesophagogastroduodenoscopy patients.

References

1.
Cadranel SA, Mougenot JF, Winter HS, Stephen M, Murphy MD. History of gastrointestinal endoscopy and pediatric endoscopy. Pediatric Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Textbook and Atlas. Hamilton, Ontario: BC Decker Inc. 2006:01-05.
2.
Monkemuller K, Wilcox CM, Munoz-Navas M, Interventional and Therapeutic Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Switzerland: Karger Medical and Scientific Publishers; 2010. [crossref] [PubMed]
3.
Albers DV, Kondo A, Bernardo WM, Sakai P, Moura RN, Silva GL, et al. Endoscopic versus surgical approach in the treatment of Zenker’s diverticulum: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open. 2016;4(6):E678-86. [crossref] [PubMed]
4.
Ferreira AO, Cravo M. Sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy: Where are we at in 2014? World J Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2015;7(2):102. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Ahlawat R, Hoilat GJ, Ross AB. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy. [Updated 2021 Nov 7]. In: Stat Pearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing.
6.
Rabbani MW, Yousaf M, Bushra. Comparison of Ketamine Gargles with Placebo for reducing post operative Sore throat. Pak Jr of Medical & Health Sciences. 2015;9(2):748-51.
7.
Sharma RP, Vaidya PR, Chand MB. The efficacy of ketamine gargle in attenuating post operative sore throat. Journal of Lumbini Medical College. 2015;3(1):08-11. [crossref]
8.
Dhanger S, Vaidiyanathan B, Rajesh IJ, Tripathy DK. Comparison of the efficacy of lignocaine viscous gargle versus ketamine gargle for the prevention of post-operative sore throat after classic laryngeal mask airway insertion: A prospective randomised trial. Airway. 2018;1(1):13.
9.
Gropper MA, Miller RD, Eriksson LI, Fleisher LA, Wiener-Kronish JP, Cohen NH, et al. Miller’s Anesthesia, 2-Volume Set E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences. 2019:881.
10.
Kumar A, Kohli A. Comeback of ketamine: Resurfacing facts and dispelling myths. Korean J Anesth. 2021;74(2):103-14. [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Mayhood J, Cress K. Effectiveness of ketamine gargle in reducing the incidence of post operative sore throat in patients undergoing airway instrumentation: A systematic review protocol. JBI Evidence Synthesis. 2014;12(7):82-88. [crossref]
12.
Lalwani J, Thakur R, Tandon M, Bhagat S. To study the effect of ketamine gargle for attenuating sore throat operative sore throat, cough and hoarseness of voice. J AnestInten Care Med. 2017;4(4):001-04. [crossref]
13.
Loix S, De Kock M, Henin P. The anti-inflammatory effects of ketamine: State of the art. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2011;62(1):47-58.
14.
Nikkheslat N. Targeting inflammation in depression: Ketamine as an anti- inflammatory antidepressant in psychiatric emergency. Brain Behav Immun Health. 2021;10(18):100-04. [crossref] [PubMed]
15.
Cam H, Pehlivan S, Dag M, Yilmaz N, Demir U, Gulsen M. Study of ideal topical pharyngeal anesthesia in upper gastrointestinal system endoscopy: A double-blind, randomised, controlled trial. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2020;(2):103-07. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Kamble NP, Gajbhare MN. Efficacy of ketamine gargles in the prevalence of sore throatoperative sore throat after endotracheal intubation. Indian Journal of Clinical Anaesthesia. 2015;2(4):251-55. [crossref]
17.
Higgins PP, Chung F, Mezei G. Postoperative sore throat after ambulatory surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2002;88(4):582-84. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Kumar MS, Vidya CM, Srikantamurthy TN, Sharavanan E. Comparison of topical application of ketamine aspirin and lignocaine on effects of intubation. Int J Res Health Sci. 2014;2:1050-56.
19.
Shetty SR, Panaych KP, Raveendra US. Randomised, single blinded, controlled, prospective study comparing ketamine, lignocaine and chlorhexidine gargle in prevention of post-operative sore throat. Jr of Health Allied Sci NU. 2015;5(03):82-86. [crossref]
20.
Altiparmak B, Turan M. Benzydamine gargle versus ketamine gargle for postoperative sore throat. Medicine Science. 2018;7(4):802-04. [crossref]
21.
Kudva S, Hegde R. Comparison of ketamine Gargle with Tramadol Gargle in attenuating post-operative sore throat following Endotracheal intubation. Ind J Applied Res. 2020;(5):71-73.
22.
Rajkumar G, Eshwori L, Konyak PY, Singh LD, Singh TR, Rani MB. Prophylactic ketamine gargle to reduce post-operative sore throat following endotracheal intubation. J Med Soc. 2012;26(3):175.

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/55049.16671

Date of Submission: Jan 19, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Mar 31, 2022
Date of Acceptance: May 14, 2022
Date of Publishing: Jul 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jan 20, 2022
• Manual Googling: May 11, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Jun 30, 2022 (10%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com