Comparison of Two Methods of Transnasal Sphenopalatine Ganglion Block
Comparison of Temperature and Pain Changes Between the Drip and Topical Methods of Administering the Transnasal Sphenopalatine Ganglion Block
Comparison of Temperature and Pain Changes Between the Drip and Topical Methods of Administering the Transnasal Sphenopalatine Ganglion Block
Sponsor study identifier
observational
74
1 country
1
Study Start
March 10, 2021
Actual (reported)Primary Completion
October 1, 2021
Actual (reported)Study Completion
October 1, 2021
Actual (reported)The transnasal sphenopalatine ganglion block(SPGB) is administered to patients with facial or head and neck pain. In the transnasal approach, the drip and topical methods are frequently used. We compared facial temperatures and VAS after transnasal SPGB.
Registry-reported information. Elapsed time and enrollment totals alone do not measure study progress or recruitment pace.
October 1, 2021
Actual (reported)Click on a node to explore related trials.
Some registry-reported names shown below are not yet linked in this graph.
Dates and qualifiers reported by the registry. Estimated dates do not confirm that a milestone has occurred.
July 15, 2020
Actual (reported)July 21, 2020
Actual (reported)March 10, 2021
Actual (reported)October 1, 2021
Actual (reported)October 1, 2021
Actual (reported)Facial temperatures
Facial temeratures changes after transnasal SPGB
Before, and 30 minutes after completion of transnasal sphenopalatine ganglion block
Visual analogue scale(VAS)
11 points pain scale score from 0 to 10
Before, and 30 minutes after completion of transnasal sphenopalatine ganglion block
Transnasal SPGB was performed by a single pain clinician. After the patient was placed in a supine and neck-extended position, 2 mL of 2% mepivacaine was placed in a syringe connected to a 16-gauge Angiocath sheath. The sheath of the Angiocath was inserted through the nostril, and 2% mepivacaine was dripped into the nostrils with the patient in a supine position. The mepivacaine drip on the nasal pharynx was maintained for 10 min. A drip of 2% mepivacaine was delivered to the nostril, where the pain was dominant. In cases of bilateral pain, mepivacaine drip was administered to both nostrils.
Transnasal SPGB was performed by a single pain clinician. The posture was the same as that in the drip method. A cotton tip applicator soaked with 2% mepivacaine was inserted vertically into the nostril. After the cotton tip applicator made contact with the posterior wall of the middle turbinate, the cotton tip applicator was fixed for 10 min. A cotton tip applicator was inserted into the nostril, where the pain was dominant. In cases of bilateral pain, two applicators were inserted into both nostrils.
In transnasal approach, several authors described the traditional technique using sterile 10cm cotton tipped applicators that are dipped in the chosen anesthetic and then advanced along the superior border of the middle turbinate, until it reaches the posterior wall of the nasopharynx. Some other techniques had described dripping one or two ml of the anesthetics into the nostril.
Registry-reported names are shown in full. Names without a link have not yet been matched to a Syfrah profile.
The patients who visited pain clinic of Ajou university hospital, and a total of 74 patients who be performed transnasal sphenopalatine ganglion block
Ajou University Hospital
Suwon, Gyunggi, 16499, South Korea
Kim
Ajou University School of Medicine
74 participants (actual enrollment reported by the registry).
First Submitted
July 15, 2020
First Posted
July 21, 2020
Study Start
March 10, 2021
Actual (reported)Comparison of Occipital Nerve and Sphenopalatine Ganglion Blockade
Sphenopalatine Ganglion Block in Bimaxillary Orthognathic Surgery
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Primary Completion
October 1, 2021
Actual (reported)Study Completion
October 1, 2021
Actual (reported)Last Updated
October 20, 2021
Record last verified: 2021-10
Download the complete ClinicalTrials.gov record imported by Syfrah, including fields not shown in this page. The registry may contain a newer revision.
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov.
JSON downloads include source attribution and retrieval details alongside the unchanged original record or the separately normalized values.
Source retrieved: