Literature DB >> 11881867

Reliability of epigastric auscultation to detect gastric insufflation.

J Brimacomb1, C Keller, S Kurian, J Myles.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We studied the reliability of epigastric auscultation to detect gastric insufflation in 30 anaesthetized, paralysed intubated patients.
METHODS: A 16FG gastric tube was positioned with the tip in the mid-oesophagus with the proximal end attached to an injection port with a one-way valve. Four observers participated in the study. Observers were paired and each pair studied 15 patients. Each patient underwent four test sequences in random order, two by each observer. Each test sequence comprised one observer injecting different volumes of air (0.25 ml, 0.5 ml, 1 ml, 2 ml, 3 ml, 4 ml, 5 ml, 10 ml, 15 ml and 0 ml as a control) in random order whilst the second blinded observer listened with a stethoscope over the epigastrium. Each randomized volume was injected rapidly at 5 s intervals for 1 min. The number of injections required to detect air entering the stomach was recorded. The stomach was deflated between each test sequence.
RESULTS: To detect air entering the stomach with 95% confidence, 11 injections were required for 0.25 ml; 7 for 0.5 ml; 3 for 1 ml; 2 for 2 ml and 3 ml, and I for > or =4 ml. The mean (range) inter- and intraobserver reliability was 0.73 (0.71-0.75) and 0.76 (0.76-0.89), respectively. The incidence of false positives was 21% (25/120) and the incidence of false negatives was 10% (103/1080), making the specificity and sensitivity 79% and 91%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that epigastric auscultation can detect gastric insufflation of 0.25 ml air after 11 breaths and > or = 4 ml air after one breath with 95% confidence. Inter- and intraobserver reliability is moderate to excellent. Epigastric auscultation should be repeated to reduce the risk of false positives.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11881867     DOI: 10.1093/bja/88.1.127

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Anaesth        ISSN: 0007-0912            Impact factor:   9.166


  13 in total

1.  Aspiration pneumonia caused by inadvertent insertion of gastric tube in an obtunded patient postoperatively.

Authors:  Zhang Xu; Wenxian Li
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2011-11-08

2.  Comparison of the intubating laryngeal mask airway and laryngeal tube placement during manual in-line stabilisation of the neck.

Authors:  R Komatsu; O Nagata; K Kamata; K Yamagata; D I Sessler; M Ozaki
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 6.955

Review 3.  [Laryngeal masks. Possibilities and limits].

Authors:  H Hillebrand; J Motsch
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 1.041

4.  Comparison of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) with cuffed and uncuffed endotracheal tubes in infants.

Authors:  Eyyup Sabri Ozden; Basak Ceyda Meco; Zekeriyya Alanoglu; Neslihan Alkıs
Journal:  Bosn J Basic Med Sci       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 3.363

5.  To characterize the incidence of airway misplacement of nasogastric tubes in anesthetized intubated patients by using a manometer technique.

Authors:  Shao-Wei Hsieh; Hung-Shu Chen; Yi-Ting Chen; Kuo-Chuan Hung
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2016-03-11       Impact factor: 2.502

6.  Guided vs. non-guided insertion of Ambu AuraGain™ in edentulous patients.

Authors:  Lukas Gasteiger; Helmuth Tauber; Corinna Velik-Salchner; Matthias Thoma; Raffaella Fantin; Vitaliy Pustilnik; Sabrina Neururer; Christian Keller; Berthold Moser
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 1.041

7.  Randomized crossover study assessing oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiber optic positioning : Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme™ versus Laryngeal Tube LTS II™ size 2 in non-paralyzed anesthetized children.

Authors:  L Gasteiger; S Ofner; B Stögermüller; B Ziegler; J Brimacombe; C Keller
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.041

8.  Comparison of the size 3 and size 4 ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized, non-paralyzed women: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Mi-Hyun Kim; Jung-Won Hwang; Eun-Sung Kim; Sung-Hee Han; Young-Tae Jeon; Sun-Mi Lee
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2014-09-24       Impact factor: 2.078

9.  Comparisons of clinical performance of Guardian laryngeal mask with laryngeal mask airway ProSeal.

Authors:  Ajay Kumar Pajiyar; Zhiting Wen; Haiyun Wang; Lin Ma; Lumin Miao; Guolin Wang
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 2.217

10.  Head elevation by 3 vs. 6 cm in ProSeal laryngeal mask airway insertion: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Mi-Jung Yun; Jung-Won Hwang; Sung-Hoon Kim; Hyo-Ju Hong; Young-Tae Jeon; Hee-Pyoung Park
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 2.217

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.