Cargando…

Comparison of a tube-holder (Rescuefix) versus tape-tying for minimizing double-lumen tube displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery: A prospective, randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND: Double-lumen endotracheal tubes (DLTs) are often displaced during change from the supine to the lateral decubitus position. The aim of this study was to determine whether Rescuefix, a recently developed tube-holder device, is more effective than the traditional tape-tying method for tube...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Byun, Sung Hye, Kang, Su Hwang, Kim, Jong Hae, Ryu, Taeha, Kim, Baek Jin, Jung, Jin Yong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4979847/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27495093
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000004486
_version_ 1782447388792717312
author Byun, Sung Hye
Kang, Su Hwang
Kim, Jong Hae
Ryu, Taeha
Kim, Baek Jin
Jung, Jin Yong
author_facet Byun, Sung Hye
Kang, Su Hwang
Kim, Jong Hae
Ryu, Taeha
Kim, Baek Jin
Jung, Jin Yong
author_sort Byun, Sung Hye
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Double-lumen endotracheal tubes (DLTs) are often displaced during change from the supine to the lateral decubitus position. The aim of this study was to determine whether Rescuefix, a recently developed tube-holder device, is more effective than the traditional tape-tying method for tube security during lateral positioning. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to a Rescuefix (R) group (n = 22) or a tape (T) group (n = 22). After intubation with a left-sided DLT and adjustment of the appropriate DLT position using a fiberoptic bronchoscope, the DLT was fixed firmly at the side of the mouth by either Rescuefix or Durapore tape. “Tracheal depth” (from the tracheal carina to the elbow connector of the DLT) and “bronchial depth” (from the left bronchial carina to the elbow connector of the DLT) were measured in the supine position using the fiberoptic bronchoscope. After positional change, tracheal and bronchial depths were measured as described above. As the primary endpoint, displacement of the DLT during positional change was evaluated by obtaining the difference in depths measured when the patient was in the supine and lateral decubitus positions. In addition, after lateral positioning of the patient, any requirement for repositioning the DLT was recorded. RESULTS: After lateral positioning, there were no significant differences in changes in tracheal and bronchial depths between the groups (tracheal depth 6.1 ± 4.4 mm [R group] and 9.1 ± 5.6 mm [T group], P = 0.058; bronchial depth 6.5 ± 4.4 mm [R group], and 8.5 ± 4.6 mm [T group], P = 0.132). Although the amount of change in tracheal and bronchial depths was not different between the groups, the need to reposition the DLT was significantly lower in the R group than in the T group (32% vs 68%, P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that use of Rescuefix did not reduce the amount of DLT displacement, but it did significantly lower the incidence of DLT repositioning compared with the tape-tying method. Therefore, Rescuefix appears to be an effective alternative to minimizing DLT displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://cris.nih.go.kr identifier: KCT0001949.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4979847
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49798472016-08-18 Comparison of a tube-holder (Rescuefix) versus tape-tying for minimizing double-lumen tube displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery: A prospective, randomized controlled study Byun, Sung Hye Kang, Su Hwang Kim, Jong Hae Ryu, Taeha Kim, Baek Jin Jung, Jin Yong Medicine (Baltimore) 3300 BACKGROUND: Double-lumen endotracheal tubes (DLTs) are often displaced during change from the supine to the lateral decubitus position. The aim of this study was to determine whether Rescuefix, a recently developed tube-holder device, is more effective than the traditional tape-tying method for tube security during lateral positioning. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to a Rescuefix (R) group (n = 22) or a tape (T) group (n = 22). After intubation with a left-sided DLT and adjustment of the appropriate DLT position using a fiberoptic bronchoscope, the DLT was fixed firmly at the side of the mouth by either Rescuefix or Durapore tape. “Tracheal depth” (from the tracheal carina to the elbow connector of the DLT) and “bronchial depth” (from the left bronchial carina to the elbow connector of the DLT) were measured in the supine position using the fiberoptic bronchoscope. After positional change, tracheal and bronchial depths were measured as described above. As the primary endpoint, displacement of the DLT during positional change was evaluated by obtaining the difference in depths measured when the patient was in the supine and lateral decubitus positions. In addition, after lateral positioning of the patient, any requirement for repositioning the DLT was recorded. RESULTS: After lateral positioning, there were no significant differences in changes in tracheal and bronchial depths between the groups (tracheal depth 6.1 ± 4.4 mm [R group] and 9.1 ± 5.6 mm [T group], P = 0.058; bronchial depth 6.5 ± 4.4 mm [R group], and 8.5 ± 4.6 mm [T group], P = 0.132). Although the amount of change in tracheal and bronchial depths was not different between the groups, the need to reposition the DLT was significantly lower in the R group than in the T group (32% vs 68%, P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that use of Rescuefix did not reduce the amount of DLT displacement, but it did significantly lower the incidence of DLT repositioning compared with the tape-tying method. Therefore, Rescuefix appears to be an effective alternative to minimizing DLT displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://cris.nih.go.kr identifier: KCT0001949. Wolters Kluwer Health 2016-08-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4979847/ /pubmed/27495093 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000004486 Text en Copyright © 2016 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
spellingShingle 3300
Byun, Sung Hye
Kang, Su Hwang
Kim, Jong Hae
Ryu, Taeha
Kim, Baek Jin
Jung, Jin Yong
Comparison of a tube-holder (Rescuefix) versus tape-tying for minimizing double-lumen tube displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery: A prospective, randomized controlled study
title Comparison of a tube-holder (Rescuefix) versus tape-tying for minimizing double-lumen tube displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery: A prospective, randomized controlled study
title_full Comparison of a tube-holder (Rescuefix) versus tape-tying for minimizing double-lumen tube displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery: A prospective, randomized controlled study
title_fullStr Comparison of a tube-holder (Rescuefix) versus tape-tying for minimizing double-lumen tube displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery: A prospective, randomized controlled study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of a tube-holder (Rescuefix) versus tape-tying for minimizing double-lumen tube displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery: A prospective, randomized controlled study
title_short Comparison of a tube-holder (Rescuefix) versus tape-tying for minimizing double-lumen tube displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery: A prospective, randomized controlled study
title_sort comparison of a tube-holder (rescuefix) versus tape-tying for minimizing double-lumen tube displacement during lateral positioning in thoracic surgery: a prospective, randomized controlled study
topic 3300
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4979847/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27495093
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000004486
work_keys_str_mv AT byunsunghye comparisonofatubeholderrescuefixversustapetyingforminimizingdoublelumentubedisplacementduringlateralpositioninginthoracicsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledstudy
AT kangsuhwang comparisonofatubeholderrescuefixversustapetyingforminimizingdoublelumentubedisplacementduringlateralpositioninginthoracicsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledstudy
AT kimjonghae comparisonofatubeholderrescuefixversustapetyingforminimizingdoublelumentubedisplacementduringlateralpositioninginthoracicsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledstudy
AT ryutaeha comparisonofatubeholderrescuefixversustapetyingforminimizingdoublelumentubedisplacementduringlateralpositioninginthoracicsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledstudy
AT kimbaekjin comparisonofatubeholderrescuefixversustapetyingforminimizingdoublelumentubedisplacementduringlateralpositioninginthoracicsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledstudy
AT jungjinyong comparisonofatubeholderrescuefixversustapetyingforminimizingdoublelumentubedisplacementduringlateralpositioninginthoracicsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledstudy