| Literature DB >> 31031473 |
Josemine Davis1, Deepak Kumar Sreevastava1, Deepak Dwivedi1, Siddaramesh Gadgi1, Saurabh Sud1, Puja Dudeja2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Complex gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures like endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) require deep sedation or general anesthesia. Comorbidities with the poor physiological condition warrant endotracheal intubation to prevent hypoxia and aspiration. The gastro-laryngeal tube (GLT), a new supraglottic airway device with a separate channel for endoscope looks promising. AIMS: The aim of the study is to compare the stress response during insertion of GLT and endotracheal intubation (ETT) in patients undergoing upper GI endoscopic procedures like ERCP. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This control versus comparison study comprised two groups with 30 patients each who underwent ETT and GLT insertion. The standard general anesthesia technique was used. In GLT group, the device was inserted without neuromuscular blocker. In ETT group, injection atracurium 0.5 mg/kg intravenous was administered as muscle relaxant for aiding endotracheal intubation. Hemodynamic parameters and time taken for the insertion of GLT/ETT were recorded. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20. Student's t-test was used to compare quantitative data between the groups. ANOVA test was applied for intragroup comparisons between GLT and ETT groups. Categorical variables were analyzed using the Chi-square test.Entities:
Keywords: Airway control; endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; endotracheal intubation; hypoventilation; hypoxia
Year: 2019 PMID: 31031473 PMCID: PMC6444943 DOI: 10.4103/aer.AER_9_19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anesth Essays Res ISSN: 2229-7685
Figure 1(a and b) Demonstrating technique of insertion of the gastro-laryngeal tube
Figure 2Consort flow chart
Demographic characteristics
| GLT group ( | ETT group ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age (years)±SD | 58.33±10.31 | 57.07±9.04 | 0.616* |
| Mean weight (kg)±SD | 63.77±8.44 | 64.20±7.27 | 0.623* |
| Mean height (cm)±SD | 165.47±4.73 | 166.10±5.18 | 0.832* |
| ASA status, | |||
| II | 11 (36.6) | 11 (36.6) | 0.598# |
| III | 19 (63.3) | 18 (60) | |
| IV | Nil | 1 (3.3) | |
| Sex (male: female), ratio ( | 16:14 | 17:13 | |
| Mean time taken for insertion of the airway (s) | 29.30±2.98 | 19.60±1.59 | 0.0001* |
| Mean duration of procedure | 50.56±7.70 | 49.62±7.40 | 0.63 |
| Mean±SD dose of propofol (mg) used at time of induction | 123.21±6.28 | 124.04±5.27 | 0.58 |
| Mean±SD dose of propofol (mg) used during maintenance as infusion | 296.49±54.90 | 325.96±52.41 | 0.03 |
*Student’s t-test (independent samples test) was applied, #Chi-square test was applied. P<0.05 considered significant. SD=Standard deviation, ASA=American Society of Anesthesiologists, GLT=Gastro-laryngeal tube, ETT=Endotracheal intubation
Comparison of grading of complexity of upper gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures between two groups
| Grade | Group | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GLT | ETT | |||
| I | 2 | 1 | 3 | 0.410 |
| II | 12 | 9 | 21 | |
| III | 16 | 18 | 34 | |
| IV | 0 | 2 | 2 | |
| Total | 30 | 30 | 60 | |
P<0.05 considered significant. Values in group represent the numbers. GLT=Gastro-laryngeal tube, ETT=Endotracheal intubation
Comparison of heart rate between two groups
| HR at (min) | Mean±SD | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| GLT group ( | ETT group ( | ||
| Baseline | 73.90±6.01 | 74.13±5.44 | 0.875 |
| 1 | 73.37±5.84 | 73.53±4.40 | 0.901 |
| 2 | 74.27±5.51 | 74.60±4.00 | 0.790 |
| 3 | 78.67±5.26 | 85.93±4.47 | 0.001 |
| 4 | 81.53±5.08 | 90.83±4.13 | 0.001 |
| 5 | 83.63±5.21 | 94.63±3.78 | 0.001 |
| 7 | 80.60±5.87 | 88.00±4.27 | 0.001 |
| 10 | 79.03±5.47 | 86.00±4.19 | 0.001 |
| 15 | 77.90±5.09 | 84.47±3.79 | 0.001 |
P<0.05 considered significant. HR=Heart rate, GLT=Gastro-laryngeal tube, ETT=Endotracheal intubation, SD=Standard deviation
Comparison of mean arterial blood pressure between two groups
| MAP at | GLT group ( | ETT group ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | ||
| Baseline | 92.27 | 6.74 | 92.91 | 8.88 | 0.753 |
| 1 min | 83.28 | 7.22 | 80.60 | 7.80 | 0.173 |
| 2 min | 72.49 | 6.66 | 71.87 | 6.09 | 0.707 |
| 3 min | 94.94 | 6.84 | 99.19 | 7.58 | 0.026* |
| 4 min | 97.16 | 6.63 | 101.49 | 7.48 | 0.021* |
| 5 min | 99.13 | 6.31 | 104.44 | 6.63 | 0.002* |
| 7 min | 97.86 | 6.07 | 102.42 | 5.70 | 0.004* |
| 10 min | 96.02 | 5.36 | 100.54 | 5.38 | 0.002* |
| 15 min | 93.92 | 4.47 | 98.08 | 4.62 | 0.001* |
P<0.05 considered significant. MAP=Mean arterial pressure, GLT=Gastro-laryngeal tube, ETT=Endotracheal intubation, SD=Standard deviation
Intragroup analysis of heart rate and mean arterial blood pressure within the two groups
| Parameter | Group | Type III Sum of Squares | df | Type III Sum of Squares | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heart Rate | ETT | 14319.563 | 2.048 | 6991.124 | 372.477* | < 0.001 |
| GLT | 3138.800 | 3.448 | 910.346 | 183.076* | < 0.001 | |
| Mean arterial pressure | ETT | 29691.023 | 2.854 | 10402.139 | 432.680* | < 0.001 |
| GLT | 17910.889 | 2.281 | 7851.504 | 323.795* | < 0.001 |
*Repeated ANOVA test with Greenhouse geisser correction applied for assessing the departure from sphericity. P<0.05 considered significant.. HR=Heart rate, GLT=Gastro-laryngeal tube, ETT=Endotracheal intubation, MAP=Mean arterial pressure