Atsushi Kohjitani1, Yoko Iwase, Kazuna Sugiyama. 1. Department of Dental Anesthesiology, Field of Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation, Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Sakuragaoka, Kagoshima, Japan. atsushik@denta.hal.kagoshima-u.ac.jp
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Appropriate sizes (internal diameters) and insertion depths of uncuffed preformed endotracheal tubes in children with cleft lip and palate, who generally have delayed growth and development in early infancy have not been elucidated. METHODS: The sizes and insertion depths of endotracheal tubes in patients who received primary cheiloplasty and/or palatoplasty in relation to age, height, and weight were retrospectively analyzed. Tube sizes were determined using an appropriate air leakage at an airway pressure of 15-20 cmH2O. Tube insertion depths were confirmed by auscultation of bilateral breathing sounds at several tube depths, placing the tip 1.5 cm above the carina. Obtained data sets were compared with previously published studies. RESULTS: The number of cases analyzed was 236 in total. The mean age, height, and weight were 327.4 +/- 199.2 days, 69.7 +/- 7.5 cm, and 8.2 +/- 1.8 kg, respectively (mean +/- SD). Neither the tube size nor tube depth in cleft lip and palate children was smaller or shorter than those of normal subjects. Discrepancies between the preformed bend and the tube insertion depth increased as the tube size increased. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings suggest that it is reasonable to apply the currently available standards for normal children, e.g. Motoyama's general guide, to predict the tube size and insertion depth for Japanese cleft lip and palate children, and that the use of the uncuffed preformed endotracheal tube is associated with a risk of endobronchial intubation, which appears to increase with age.
BACKGROUND: Appropriate sizes (internal diameters) and insertion depths of uncuffed preformed endotracheal tubes in children with cleft lip and palate, who generally have delayed growth and development in early infancy have not been elucidated. METHODS: The sizes and insertion depths of endotracheal tubes in patients who received primary cheiloplasty and/or palatoplasty in relation to age, height, and weight were retrospectively analyzed. Tube sizes were determined using an appropriate air leakage at an airway pressure of 15-20 cmH2O. Tube insertion depths were confirmed by auscultation of bilateral breathing sounds at several tube depths, placing the tip 1.5 cm above the carina. Obtained data sets were compared with previously published studies. RESULTS: The number of cases analyzed was 236 in total. The mean age, height, and weight were 327.4 +/- 199.2 days, 69.7 +/- 7.5 cm, and 8.2 +/- 1.8 kg, respectively (mean +/- SD). Neither the tube size nor tube depth in cleft lip and palatechildren was smaller or shorter than those of normal subjects. Discrepancies between the preformed bend and the tube insertion depth increased as the tube size increased. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings suggest that it is reasonable to apply the currently available standards for normal children, e.g. Motoyama's general guide, to predict the tube size and insertion depth for Japanese cleft lip and palatechildren, and that the use of the uncuffed preformed endotracheal tube is associated with a risk of endobronchial intubation, which appears to increase with age.