Abstract
BACKGROUND: Different techniques have been introduced to reduce the complications of nasotracheal intubation. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of nasotracheal intubation complications in finger-guided and conventional methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this double-blind randomized trial study, 70 patients who were candidates for oral and maxillofacial surgery who required nasal intubation were included in the study finally of which 33 patients with conventional method and 35 patients with finger-guided tubes in the nasopharynx were analyzed at the end of the study. Variables such as success rate, hemodynamic response, and complications of intubation were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of hemodynamic response to intubation (P > 0.05). There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of success in tracheal intubation (P < 0.05). There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of epistaxis immediately after intubation (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of nasal turbine fractures (P > 0.05). However, the frequency of submucosal intubation in the conventional method was significantly higher than the other group (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Nasotracheal intubation using the finger guiding technique in the nasopharynx is associated with a higher success rate and less complications after intubation such as epistaxis and submucosal intubation compared to the conventional method.