Brian D'Anza1, Jesse Knight, J Scott Greene. 1. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Facial Plastic Surgery, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine the relationship between body mass index along with other anthropomorphic variables as they relate to tracheal airway dimensions. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: This was a radiographic study of 123 consecutive hospitalized patients undergoing tracheotomy over a 4-year period (2007-2011). We measured airway dimensions in axial computed tomography imaging and made comparisons with height, weight, body mass index, gender, and age. Measurements were taken at the first tracheal ring level including anterior-posterior length, width, and calculated area. We expected higher body mass index not to be a good predictor of larger airway dimensions. RESULTS: The linear regression model showed body mass index was significantly inversely related to tracheal width after controlling for gender and age (P = .0389). For every 1 kg/m(2) increase in body mass index, the tracheal width decreased by 0.05 mm. There was a trend for airway area to diminish with increasing body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: These results are consistent with the hypothesis that obese patients do not have larger airways. Our study indicated a trend toward smaller airways as body mass index increased. Specifically, as body mass index increases, tracheal width appears to decrease. This information should help medical professionals avoid the tendency to use a larger tube to secure the airway of an obese patient. Hopefully, this will result in further research into the field and may prevent future airway injuries in a society where obesity has become epidemic. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 125:1093-1097, 2015.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine the relationship between body mass index along with other anthropomorphic variables as they relate to tracheal airway dimensions. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: This was a radiographic study of 123 consecutive hospitalized patients undergoing tracheotomy over a 4-year period (2007-2011). We measured airway dimensions in axial computed tomography imaging and made comparisons with height, weight, body mass index, gender, and age. Measurements were taken at the first tracheal ring level including anterior-posterior length, width, and calculated area. We expected higher body mass index not to be a good predictor of larger airway dimensions. RESULTS: The linear regression model showed body mass index was significantly inversely related to tracheal width after controlling for gender and age (P = .0389). For every 1 kg/m(2) increase in body mass index, the tracheal width decreased by 0.05 mm. There was a trend for airway area to diminish with increasing body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: These results are consistent with the hypothesis that obesepatients do not have larger airways. Our study indicated a trend toward smaller airways as body mass index increased. Specifically, as body mass index increases, tracheal width appears to decrease. This information should help medical professionals avoid the tendency to use a larger tube to secure the airway of an obesepatient. Hopefully, this will result in further research into the field and may prevent future airway injuries in a society where obesity has become epidemic. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 125:1093-1097, 2015.
Authors: Alexander T Hillel; Selmin Karatayli-Ozgursoy; Idris Samad; Simon R A Best; Vinciya Pandian; Laureano Giraldez; Jennifer Gross; Christopher Wootten; Alexander Gelbard; Lee M Akst; Michael M Johns Journal: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Date: 2015-10-14 Impact factor: 1.547
Authors: Maryanne Z Mariyaselvam; Lucy L Marsh; Sarah Bamford; Ann Smith; Matt P Wise; David W Williams Journal: BMC Anesthesiol Date: 2017-03-04 Impact factor: 2.217
Authors: C E Nightingale; M P Margarson; E Shearer; J W Redman; D N Lucas; J M Cousins; W T A Fox; N J Kennedy; P J Venn; M Skues; D Gabbott; U Misra; J J Pandit; M T Popat; R Griffiths Journal: Anaesthesia Date: 2015-05-07 Impact factor: 6.955