BACKGROUND: In 2005, the European Resuscitation Council and the American Heart Association published new guidelines for Advanced Life Support. One of the points was to reduce the time without chest compressions in the first phase of cardiac arrest. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated in a manikin model whether using the single-use laryngeal tube with suction option (LTS-D) instead of endotracheal intubation (ET) and bag-mask-valve ventilation (BMV) for emergency airway management could reduce the "no-flow time" (NFT). The NFT is defined as the time during resuscitation when no chest compressions take place. METHODS: A randomized, prospective study was undertaken with 150 volunteers who performed management of a standardized simulated cardiac arrest in a manikin. Every participant was randomized to one of three different airway management groups (LTS-D vs. ET vs. BMV). RESULTS: The LTS-D was inserted significantly faster than the ET tube (15 s vs. 44 s, respectively, p < 0.01). During the cardiac arrest simulation, establishing and performing ventilation took an average of 57 s with the LTS-D compared to 116 s with ET and 111 s with the BMV. Using the LTS-D significantly reduced NFT compared to ET and the BMV (125 s vs. 207 s vs. 160 s; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In our manikin study, NFT was reduced significantly when the LTS-D was used when compared to ET and BMV. The results of our manikin study suggest that for personnel not experienced in tracheal intubation, the LTS-D offers a good alternative to ET and BMV to manage the airway during resuscitation, and to avoid the failure to achieve tracheal intubation with the ET, and the failure to achieve adequate ventilation with the BMV.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In 2005, the European Resuscitation Council and the American Heart Association published new guidelines for Advanced Life Support. One of the points was to reduce the time without chest compressions in the first phase of cardiac arrest. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated in a manikin model whether using the single-use laryngeal tube with suction option (LTS-D) instead of endotracheal intubation (ET) and bag-mask-valve ventilation (BMV) for emergency airway management could reduce the "no-flow time" (NFT). The NFT is defined as the time during resuscitation when no chest compressions take place. METHODS: A randomized, prospective study was undertaken with 150 volunteers who performed management of a standardized simulated cardiac arrest in a manikin. Every participant was randomized to one of three different airway management groups (LTS-D vs. ET vs. BMV). RESULTS: The LTS-D was inserted significantly faster than the ET tube (15 s vs. 44 s, respectively, p < 0.01). During the cardiac arrest simulation, establishing and performing ventilation took an average of 57 s with the LTS-D compared to 116 s with ET and 111 s with the BMV. Using the LTS-D significantly reduced NFT compared to ET and the BMV (125 s vs. 207 s vs. 160 s; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In our manikin study, NFT was reduced significantly when the LTS-D was used when compared to ET and BMV. The results of our manikin study suggest that for personnel not experienced in tracheal intubation, the LTS-D offers a good alternative to ET and BMV to manage the airway during resuscitation, and to avoid the failure to achieve tracheal intubation with the ET, and the failure to achieve adequate ventilation with the BMV.