Literature DB >> 17573388

Cricoid pressure prevents placement of the laryngeal tube and laryngeal tube-suction II.

T Asai1, R W L Goy, E H C Liu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The laryngeal tube has a potential role in patients with a difficult airway, but cricoid pressure is required if the patient is at risk of aspiration. The effect of cricoid pressure on insertion of these devices is unknown.
METHODS: In a randomized cross-over study, the laryngeal tube (25 patients) or the laryngeal tube-suction II (15 patients) was inserted with cricoid pressure applied on one occasion and with sham pressure on the other occasion. Adequacy of ventilation, time to achieve adequate ventilation, and the leak pressure were assessed.
RESULTS: Ventilation was adequate in all patients when sham pressure was applied. Cricoid pressure significantly reduced the rate of adequate ventilation to 6 of 25 patients for the laryngeal tube [P < 0.001; 95% confidence interval (CI) for difference: 59-93%] and to 5 of 15 patients for the laryngeal tube-suction II (P < 0.05; 95% CI for difference: 43-91%). The median time taken to achieve adequate ventilation for the laryngeal tube was 10 s [inter-quartile range (IQR): 8-15] (range 5-26) for sham pressure and 25 s (15-32) (15-33) for cricoid pressure; the median leak pressure was 30 (IQR: 30-30) (range 20-30) cm H2O for sham pressure and 15.5 (14.3-20.5) (12-22) cm H2O for cricoid pressure.
CONCLUSIONS: Continuous cricoid pressure prevents correct placement of the laryngeal tube and the laryngeal tube-suction II such that placement and ventilation via these devices are ineffective. The effect of cricoid pressure on ventilation via these devices, after correct placement, remains unknown.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17573388     DOI: 10.1093/bja/aem159

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


  6 in total

Review 1.  [Cricoid pressure].

Authors:  D Steinmann; H-J Priebe
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  All India Difficult Airway Association 2016 guidelines for the management of unanticipated difficult tracheal intubation in adults.

Authors:  Sheila Nainan Myatra; Amit Shah; Pankaj Kundra; Apeksh Patwa; Venkateswaran Ramkumar; Jigeeshu Vasishtha Divatia; Ubaradka S Raveendra; Sumalatha Radhakrishna Shetty; Syed Moied Ahmed; Jeson Rajan Doctor; Dilip K Pawar; Singaravelu Ramesh; Sabyasachi Das; Rakesh Garg
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2016-12

Review 3.  Effectiveness and risks of cricoid pressure during rapid sequence induction for endotracheal intubation.

Authors:  Catherine M Algie; Robert K Mahar; Hannah B Tan; Greer Wilson; Patrick D Mahar; Jason Wasiak
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-11-18

4.  Difficult Airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults.

Authors:  C Frerk; V S Mitchell; A F McNarry; C Mendonca; R Bhagrath; A Patel; E P O'Sullivan; N M Woodall; I Ahmad
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2015-11-10       Impact factor: 9.166

Review 5.  Extraglottic airway devices: technology update.

Authors:  Bimla Sharma; Chand Sahai; Jayashree Sood
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2017-08-17

6.  Canadian Airway Focus Group updated consensus-based recommendations for management of the difficult airway: part 1. Difficult airway management encountered in an unconscious patient.

Authors:  J Adam Law; Laura V Duggan; Mathieu Asselin; Paul Baker; Edward Crosby; Andrew Downey; Orlando R Hung; Philip M Jones; François Lemay; Rudiger Noppens; Matteo Parotto; Roanne Preston; Nick Sowers; Kathryn Sparrow; Timothy P Turkstra; David T Wong; George Kovacs
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 5.063

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.