Cargando…

Comparison of GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion with lateral neck pressure nasogastric tube insertion techniques in anesthetized patients: a randomized clinical study

OBJECTIVE: Nasogastric tube (NGT) insertion in anesthetized and intubated patients can be challenging, even for experienced anesthesiologists. Various techniques have been proposed to facilitate NGT insertion in these patients. This study aimed to compare the success rate and time required for NGT i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Purngpipattrakul, Pitchaporn, Petsakul, Suttasinee, Chatmonkolchart, Sunisa, Nuanjun, Kanjana, Boonchuduang, Somrutai
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7706009/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33256794
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04911-0
_version_ 1783617064739536896
author Purngpipattrakul, Pitchaporn
Petsakul, Suttasinee
Chatmonkolchart, Sunisa
Nuanjun, Kanjana
Boonchuduang, Somrutai
author_facet Purngpipattrakul, Pitchaporn
Petsakul, Suttasinee
Chatmonkolchart, Sunisa
Nuanjun, Kanjana
Boonchuduang, Somrutai
author_sort Purngpipattrakul, Pitchaporn
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Nasogastric tube (NGT) insertion in anesthetized and intubated patients can be challenging, even for experienced anesthesiologists. Various techniques have been proposed to facilitate NGT insertion in these patients. This study aimed to compare the success rate and time required for NGT insertion between GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion, with lateral neck pressure techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This randomized clinical trial was performed at a teaching hospital on 86 adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery, under relaxant general anesthesia, who required intraoperative NGT insertion. The patients were randomized into two groups, the GlideScope™ group (group G) and the neck flexion with lateral neck pressure group (group F). The success rate of the first and second attempts, duration of insertion, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: The total success rate was 79.1% in group G, compared with 76.7% in group F (P = 1). The median time required for NGT insertion was significantly longer in group G, for both first and second attempts (97 vs 42 s P < 0.001) and (70 vs 48.5 s P = 0.015), respectively. Complications were reported in 23 patients (53.5%) in group G and 13 patients (30.2%) in group F. Bleeding and kinking were the most common complications for both techniques. CONCLUSION: Using GlideScope™ visualization to facilitate NGT insertion was comparable to neck flexion with lateral neck pressure technique, in the degree of success rates of insertion. Although complications were not statistically significant between groups, neck flexion with lateral neck pressure technique was significantly less time-consuming for both first and second attempts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered: Thai Clinical Trial Registry (TCTR)20171229003. Registered on 19 December 2017
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7706009
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77060092020-12-01 Comparison of GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion with lateral neck pressure nasogastric tube insertion techniques in anesthetized patients: a randomized clinical study Purngpipattrakul, Pitchaporn Petsakul, Suttasinee Chatmonkolchart, Sunisa Nuanjun, Kanjana Boonchuduang, Somrutai Trials Research OBJECTIVE: Nasogastric tube (NGT) insertion in anesthetized and intubated patients can be challenging, even for experienced anesthesiologists. Various techniques have been proposed to facilitate NGT insertion in these patients. This study aimed to compare the success rate and time required for NGT insertion between GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion, with lateral neck pressure techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This randomized clinical trial was performed at a teaching hospital on 86 adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery, under relaxant general anesthesia, who required intraoperative NGT insertion. The patients were randomized into two groups, the GlideScope™ group (group G) and the neck flexion with lateral neck pressure group (group F). The success rate of the first and second attempts, duration of insertion, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: The total success rate was 79.1% in group G, compared with 76.7% in group F (P = 1). The median time required for NGT insertion was significantly longer in group G, for both first and second attempts (97 vs 42 s P < 0.001) and (70 vs 48.5 s P = 0.015), respectively. Complications were reported in 23 patients (53.5%) in group G and 13 patients (30.2%) in group F. Bleeding and kinking were the most common complications for both techniques. CONCLUSION: Using GlideScope™ visualization to facilitate NGT insertion was comparable to neck flexion with lateral neck pressure technique, in the degree of success rates of insertion. Although complications were not statistically significant between groups, neck flexion with lateral neck pressure technique was significantly less time-consuming for both first and second attempts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered: Thai Clinical Trial Registry (TCTR)20171229003. Registered on 19 December 2017 BioMed Central 2020-11-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7706009/ /pubmed/33256794 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04911-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Purngpipattrakul, Pitchaporn
Petsakul, Suttasinee
Chatmonkolchart, Sunisa
Nuanjun, Kanjana
Boonchuduang, Somrutai
Comparison of GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion with lateral neck pressure nasogastric tube insertion techniques in anesthetized patients: a randomized clinical study
title Comparison of GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion with lateral neck pressure nasogastric tube insertion techniques in anesthetized patients: a randomized clinical study
title_full Comparison of GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion with lateral neck pressure nasogastric tube insertion techniques in anesthetized patients: a randomized clinical study
title_fullStr Comparison of GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion with lateral neck pressure nasogastric tube insertion techniques in anesthetized patients: a randomized clinical study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion with lateral neck pressure nasogastric tube insertion techniques in anesthetized patients: a randomized clinical study
title_short Comparison of GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion with lateral neck pressure nasogastric tube insertion techniques in anesthetized patients: a randomized clinical study
title_sort comparison of glidescope™ visualization and neck flexion with lateral neck pressure nasogastric tube insertion techniques in anesthetized patients: a randomized clinical study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7706009/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33256794
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04911-0
work_keys_str_mv AT purngpipattrakulpitchaporn comparisonofglidescopevisualizationandneckflexionwithlateralneckpressurenasogastrictubeinsertiontechniquesinanesthetizedpatientsarandomizedclinicalstudy
AT petsakulsuttasinee comparisonofglidescopevisualizationandneckflexionwithlateralneckpressurenasogastrictubeinsertiontechniquesinanesthetizedpatientsarandomizedclinicalstudy
AT chatmonkolchartsunisa comparisonofglidescopevisualizationandneckflexionwithlateralneckpressurenasogastrictubeinsertiontechniquesinanesthetizedpatientsarandomizedclinicalstudy
AT nuanjunkanjana comparisonofglidescopevisualizationandneckflexionwithlateralneckpressurenasogastrictubeinsertiontechniquesinanesthetizedpatientsarandomizedclinicalstudy
AT boonchuduangsomrutai comparisonofglidescopevisualizationandneckflexionwithlateralneckpressurenasogastrictubeinsertiontechniquesinanesthetizedpatientsarandomizedclinicalstudy