Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 16  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 534-538

Comparison of extraoral and intraoral routes of glossopharyngeal nerve block for pain relief in patient with carcinoma tongue: A prospective randomized study

1 Department of Anaesthesiology, King George Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Department of Surgical Oncology, King George Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Sarita Singh
Department of Anaesthesiology, King George Medical University, H No-18/248, Indira Nagar, Lucknow - 226 016, Uttar Pradesh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_309_18

Rights and Permissions

Background and Objective: Glossopharyngeal nerve block (GNB) technique has been used as alternative of treatment of cancer and noncancer pain of the oral cavity. The objective of the study is to compare the two approaches (extraoral and intraoral) of GNB in patients of carcinoma of the tongue in terms of efficacy, duration, and complications. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective comparative randomized study over a period of 1 year. Fifty patients of either sex of ASA physical status and 2, between 21 and 70 years of age, suffering from carcinoma of the tongue, were selected. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group I received 4 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine combined with 40 mg, of triamcinolonacetonide by extraoral approach of GNB, and Group II received the same amount of drug by intraoral approach of GNB. Hemodynamic parameters, degree of pain relief using visual analog scale (VAS), number of attempts, effect on quality of life (QOL), and complication were noted during the performance of GNB. Results: Demographic profile in both groups was comparable. Rate of complication and number of attempts to complete intervention were higher in Group I, which was found to be statistically significant. However, mean VAS scores in Group I were significantly higher as compared to those in Group II during most of the study period starting from the 1st follow-up at 30 min to the 2nd month postintervention (P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference in mean QOL scores of two groups was observed for the entire study period except at 1 week when mean scores in Group I were higher as compared to those in Group II (P = 0.011). Conclusion: The intraoral approach of GNB was better with respect to pain control and improvement in QOL whereas the rate of complication and number of attempts was lower in extraoral approach of GNB.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded233    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal