M D Daley1, P H Norman, L A Coveler. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To examine current practice regarding the performance of tracheal extubation of adult surgical patients while deeply anesthetized (deep extubation). DESIGN AND SETTING: Survey comprised of an anonymous written questionnaire mailed to 1,000 randomly selected active American Society of Anesthesiologists members. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Questionnaires were mailed between February and April 1998. Five hundred eighty-three completed forms were returned, 538 of which were suitable for data analysis. Responses from anesthesiologists who infrequently or never administer general anesthetics to adult surgical patients were excluded. The overall frequency of deep extubation of adults was "never" for 106 respondents (19.7%), "rarely" for 87 (16.2%), and "more frequently" for 345 (64.1%). The most common reasons for never performing deep extubations were lack of necessity and concern regarding potential laryngospasm and aspiration. The most frequent indications for deep extubations were unclipped intracranial aneurysm, reactive airway disease, and open-globe eye surgery. The most frequent contraindications to deep extubations for those who otherwise perform the technique were difficult airway, aspiration risk, and obesity. After performing a deep extubation, 44.0% of respondents remain with the patient in the operating room until he or she is awake. Deep extubations were perceived to have no consistent effect on operating room turnover time by 61.6% of anesthesiologists who perform them. CONCLUSIONS: Most anesthesiologists in this survey perform deep extubations in adult surgical patients. Lack of necessity and potential respiratory complications were the main reasons cited by those who do not use the technique. Future investigations are necessary to examine the risk-to-benefit ratio of the technique in adults. Our results may be used to determine which potential indications should be examined in such studies and to help delineate the standard of care followed in this country.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To examine current practice regarding the performance of tracheal extubation of adult surgical patients while deeply anesthetized (deep extubation). DESIGN AND SETTING: Survey comprised of an anonymous written questionnaire mailed to 1,000 randomly selected active American Society of Anesthesiologists members. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Questionnaires were mailed between February and April 1998. Five hundred eighty-three completed forms were returned, 538 of which were suitable for data analysis. Responses from anesthesiologists who infrequently or never administer general anesthetics to adult surgical patients were excluded. The overall frequency of deep extubation of adults was "never" for 106 respondents (19.7%), "rarely" for 87 (16.2%), and "more frequently" for 345 (64.1%). The most common reasons for never performing deep extubations were lack of necessity and concern regarding potential laryngospasm and aspiration. The most frequent indications for deep extubations were unclipped intracranial aneurysm, reactive airway disease, and open-globe eye surgery. The most frequent contraindications to deep extubations for those who otherwise perform the technique were difficult airway, aspiration risk, and obesity. After performing a deep extubation, 44.0% of respondents remain with the patient in the operating room until he or she is awake. Deep extubations were perceived to have no consistent effect on operating room turnover time by 61.6% of anesthesiologists who perform them. CONCLUSIONS: Most anesthesiologists in this survey perform deep extubations in adult surgical patients. Lack of necessity and potential respiratory complications were the main reasons cited by those who do not use the technique. Future investigations are necessary to examine the risk-to-benefit ratio of the technique in adults. Our results may be used to determine which potential indications should be examined in such studies and to help delineate the standard of care followed in this country.
Authors: Jeremy Juang; Martha Cordoba; Alex Ciaramella; Mark Xiao; Jeremy Goldfarb; Jorge Enrique Bayter; Alvaro Andres Macias Journal: BMC Anesthesiol Date: 2020-10-29 Impact factor: 2.217