Cargando…
Supraglottic airway device versus a channeled or non-channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope for accidental extubation in the prone position: A randomized crossover manikin study
BACKGROUND: It is very rare but challenging to perform emergency airway management for accidental extubation in a patient whose head and neck are fixed in the prone position when urgently turning the patient to the supine position would be unsafe. The authors hypothesized that tracheal intubation wi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6023683/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29924038 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011190 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: It is very rare but challenging to perform emergency airway management for accidental extubation in a patient whose head and neck are fixed in the prone position when urgently turning the patient to the supine position would be unsafe. The authors hypothesized that tracheal intubation with a videolaryngoscope would allow effective airway rescue in this situation compared with a supraglottic airway device and designed a randomized crossover manikin study to test this hypothesis. METHODS: The authors compared airway rescue performances of the 3 devices—the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA; Teleflex Medical, Westmeath, Ireland) as a reference; the Pentax AWS (AWS; Nihon Kohden, Tokyo, Japan) as a channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope; and the McGRATH videolaryngoscope (McGRATH; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) as a nonchanneled blade type in a manikin fixed to the operating table in the prone position. Twenty-one anesthesiologists performed airway management on the prone manikin with the 3 devices, and the time required for intubation/ventilation and the success rates were recorded. RESULTS: The median (range) intubation/ventilation times with the PLMA, AWS, and McGRATH were 24.5 (13.5–89.5) s, 29.9 (17.1–79.8) s, and 46.7 (21.9–211.7) s, respectively. There was no significant difference in intubation/ventilation times between the PLMA and AWS. The AWS permitted significantly faster tracheal intubation than did the McGRATH (P = 0.006). The success rates with the PLMA (100%) and AWS (100%) were significantly greater than that with the McGRATH (71.4%). Airway management performance of the PLMA and AWS was comparable between devices and better than that of the McGRATH in the prone position. CONCLUSIONS: Considering that tracheal intubation can provide a more secure airway and more stable ventilation than the PLMA, re-intubation with a channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope such as the AWS may be a useful method of airway rescue for accidental extubation in patients in the prone position. |
---|