Literature DB >> 19020138

Laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation in the head-elevated position in obese patients: a randomized, controlled, equivalence trial.

Srikantha L Rao1, Allen R Kunselman, H Gregg Schuler, Susan DesHarnais.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The proper positioning of patients before direct laryngoscopy is a key step that facilitates tracheal intubation. In obese patients, the 25 degree back-up or head-elevated laryngoscopic position, which is better than the supine position for tracheal intubation, is usually achieved by placing blankets or other devices under the patient's head and shoulders. This position can also be achieved by reconfiguring the normally flat operating room (OR) table by flexing the table at the trunk-thigh hinge and raising the back (trunk) portion of the table (OR table ramp). This table-ramp method can be used without the added expense of positioning devices, and it reduces the possibility of injury to the patient or providers that can occur during removal of such devices once tracheal intubation is achieved. In this study, we sought to determine if the table-ramp method of patient positioning was equivalent to the blanket method with regard to the time required for tracheal intubation.
METHODS: Eighty-five adults with a Body Mass Index >30 kg/m(2), scheduled for elective surgery, consented to participate in this prospective randomized equivalence study conducted in a teaching hospital. The randomization scheme used permuted blocks with subjects equally allocated to be positioned using either the blanket method or the table-ramp method. The end-point in either case was to achieve a head-elevated position, where the patient's external auditory meatus and sternal notch were in the same horizontal plane. Although all patients were positioned by the same anesthesiologist, laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation were performed by trainees with various levels of expertise. Standard i.v. induction and tracheal intubation techniques were used. The time from loss of consciousness to the time after tracheal intubation when end-tidal CO(2) was detected was recorded. The effectiveness of mask ventilation and quality of laryngeal exposure were also noted.
RESULTS: The mean time (SD) to tracheal intubation was 175 (66) s in the blanket group, as compared to 163 (71) s in the table-ramp group. Assuming the bounds for equivalence are -55,55 s, our study found a 95% confidence interval of -36.22, 13.52 s using two one-sided tests for equivalence corresponding to a significance level of 0.05. There was no difference in the number of attempts at laryngoscopy (P = 0.21) and tracheal intubation (P = 0.76) required to secure the airway between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Before induction of anesthesia, obese patients can be positioned with their head elevated above their shoulders on the operating table, on a ramp created by placing blankets under their upper body or by reconfiguring the OR table. For the purpose of direct laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation, these two methods are equivalent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19020138     DOI: 10.1213/ane.0b013e31818556ed

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  24 in total

1.  A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Ramped Position vs Sniffing Position During Endotracheal Intubation of Critically Ill Adults.

Authors:  Matthew W Semler; David R Janz; Derek W Russell; Jonathan D Casey; Robert J Lentz; Aline N Zouk; Bennett P deBoisblanc; Jairo I Santanilla; Yasin A Khan; Aaron M Joffe; William S Stigler; Todd W Rice
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2017-05-06       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 2.  Respiratory management of the obese patient undergoing surgery.

Authors:  Luke E Hodgson; Patrick B Murphy; Nicholas Hart
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Cross-over study of novice intubators performing endotracheal intubation in an upright versus supine position.

Authors:  Joseph S Turner; Timothy J Ellender; Enola R Okonkwo; Tyler M Stepsis; Andrew C Stevens; Christopher S Eddy; Erik G Sembroski; Anthony J Perkins; Dylan D Cooper
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 3.397

4.  Ramp position for intubating morbidly obese parturient: What's new?

Authors:  Chitra Rajeswari Thangaswamy; Lenin Babu Elakkumanan
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2011-03

5.  Airway tube exchanger techniques in morbidly obese patients.

Authors:  Danai Udomtecha
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2012-02-09

6.  Response.

Authors:  Matthew W Semler; David R Janz; Jonathan D Casey; Derek W Russell; Todd W Rice
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 10.262

7.  Comparison of the rate of successful endotracheal intubation between the "sniffing" and "ramped" positions in patients with an expected difficult intubation: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Ju-Hwan Lee; Hoe-Chang Jung; Ji-Hoon Shim; Cheol Lee
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2015-03-30

8.  Pre-selection of primary intubation technique is associated with a low incidence of difficult intubation in patients with a BMI of 35 kg/m2 or higher.

Authors:  Tiberiu Ezri; Ronen Waintrob; Yuri Avelansky; Alexander Izakson; Katia Dayan; Mordechai Shimonov
Journal:  Rom J Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  2018-04

9.  The difficult airway with recommendations for management--part 2--the anticipated difficult airway.

Authors:  J Adam Law; Natasha Broemling; Richard M Cooper; Pierre Drolet; Laura V Duggan; Donald E Griesdale; Orlando R Hung; Philip M Jones; George Kovacs; Simon Massey; Ian R Morris; Timothy Mullen; Michael F Murphy; Roanne Preston; Viren N Naik; Jeanette Scott; Shean Stacey; Timothy P Turkstra; David T Wong
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 5.063

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.