Cargando…

Evaluation of airway obstruction by nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep

The use of nasopharyngoscopy during the application of intrathoracic pressure (Müller maneuver) is frequently employed to establish the site of upper airway obstruction. The Müller maneuver, however, is used when the patient is awake and therefore may not correlate with obstruction occurring during...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gregório, Marcelo Gervilla, Jacomelli, Márcia, Figueiredo, Adelaide C., Cahali, Michel Burihan, Junior, Wilson Leite Pedreira, Filho, Geraldo Lorenzi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9445644/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18094802
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1808-8694(15)30121-X
_version_ 1784783466219438080
author Gregório, Marcelo Gervilla
Jacomelli, Márcia
Figueiredo, Adelaide C.
Cahali, Michel Burihan
Junior, Wilson Leite Pedreira
Filho, Geraldo Lorenzi
author_facet Gregório, Marcelo Gervilla
Jacomelli, Márcia
Figueiredo, Adelaide C.
Cahali, Michel Burihan
Junior, Wilson Leite Pedreira
Filho, Geraldo Lorenzi
author_sort Gregório, Marcelo Gervilla
collection PubMed
description The use of nasopharyngoscopy during the application of intrathoracic pressure (Müller maneuver) is frequently employed to establish the site of upper airway obstruction. The Müller maneuver, however, is used when the patient is awake and therefore may not correlate with obstruction occurring during sleep. Aim: to compare the degree of pharyngeal obstruction in the retropalatal and retroglossal regions during the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep using nasopharyngoscopy. Study design: A prospective, case series study. Material and methods: Eight patients (three males, five females), with a mean age of 48.6 +/- 9,2 year, underwent nasopharyngoscopy to assess airway anatomy and funciton during the Müller maneuver while awake and during sleep induced by drip infusion of Midazolam. Results: Retropalatal obstruction was similar during the Müller maneuver and sleep (mean + standard deviation = 3.13 +/- 0.99 and 2.75 +/- 0.46, p= 0.234). Retroglossal obstruction was significantly lower during Müller maneuver compared to sleep (mean + standard deviation 0.63 +/- 1.06 and 2.63 +/- 1.30, respectively, p= 0.005). Conclusion: The sleep inducing method was safe under the monitored conditions of this study, and detected more retroglossal obstruction than the Müller maneuver.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9445644
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94456442022-09-09 Evaluation of airway obstruction by nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep Gregório, Marcelo Gervilla Jacomelli, Márcia Figueiredo, Adelaide C. Cahali, Michel Burihan Junior, Wilson Leite Pedreira Filho, Geraldo Lorenzi Braz J Otorhinolaryngol Original Article The use of nasopharyngoscopy during the application of intrathoracic pressure (Müller maneuver) is frequently employed to establish the site of upper airway obstruction. The Müller maneuver, however, is used when the patient is awake and therefore may not correlate with obstruction occurring during sleep. Aim: to compare the degree of pharyngeal obstruction in the retropalatal and retroglossal regions during the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep using nasopharyngoscopy. Study design: A prospective, case series study. Material and methods: Eight patients (three males, five females), with a mean age of 48.6 +/- 9,2 year, underwent nasopharyngoscopy to assess airway anatomy and funciton during the Müller maneuver while awake and during sleep induced by drip infusion of Midazolam. Results: Retropalatal obstruction was similar during the Müller maneuver and sleep (mean + standard deviation = 3.13 +/- 0.99 and 2.75 +/- 0.46, p= 0.234). Retroglossal obstruction was significantly lower during Müller maneuver compared to sleep (mean + standard deviation 0.63 +/- 1.06 and 2.63 +/- 1.30, respectively, p= 0.005). Conclusion: The sleep inducing method was safe under the monitored conditions of this study, and detected more retroglossal obstruction than the Müller maneuver. Elsevier 2015-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9445644/ /pubmed/18094802 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1808-8694(15)30121-X Text en . https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Gregório, Marcelo Gervilla
Jacomelli, Márcia
Figueiredo, Adelaide C.
Cahali, Michel Burihan
Junior, Wilson Leite Pedreira
Filho, Geraldo Lorenzi
Evaluation of airway obstruction by nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep
title Evaluation of airway obstruction by nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep
title_full Evaluation of airway obstruction by nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep
title_fullStr Evaluation of airway obstruction by nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of airway obstruction by nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep
title_short Evaluation of airway obstruction by nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep
title_sort evaluation of airway obstruction by nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of the müller maneuver versus induced sleep
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9445644/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18094802
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1808-8694(15)30121-X
work_keys_str_mv AT gregoriomarcelogervilla evaluationofairwayobstructionbynasopharyngoscopycomparisonofthemullermaneuverversusinducedsleep
AT jacomellimarcia evaluationofairwayobstructionbynasopharyngoscopycomparisonofthemullermaneuverversusinducedsleep
AT figueiredoadelaidec evaluationofairwayobstructionbynasopharyngoscopycomparisonofthemullermaneuverversusinducedsleep
AT cahalimichelburihan evaluationofairwayobstructionbynasopharyngoscopycomparisonofthemullermaneuverversusinducedsleep
AT juniorwilsonleitepedreira evaluationofairwayobstructionbynasopharyngoscopycomparisonofthemullermaneuverversusinducedsleep
AT filhogeraldolorenzi evaluationofairwayobstructionbynasopharyngoscopycomparisonofthemullermaneuverversusinducedsleep