H Herff1, W A Wetsch2, S Finke1, F Dusse1, T Mitterlechner3, P Paal4, V Wenzel5, D C Schroeder1. 1. Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 67, 50937, Cologne, Germany. 2. Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 67, 50937, Cologne, Germany. wolfgang.wetsch@uk-koeln.de. 3. Department of Anaesthesiology, Privatklinik Hochrum, Sanatorium der Kreuzschwestern, Rum, Austria. 4. Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Hospitallers Brothers Hospital, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria. 5. Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Pain Therapy, Klinikum Friedrichshafen, Friedrichshafen, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Failed airway management is the major contributor for anaesthesia-related morbidity and mortality. Cannot-intubate-cannot-ventilate scenarios are the most critical emergency in airway management, and belong to the worst imaginable scenarios in an anaesthetist's life. In such situations, apnoeic oxygenation might be useful to avoid hypoxaemia. Anaesthesia guidelines recommend careful preoxygenation and application of high flow oxygen in difficult intubation scenarios to prevent episodes of deoxygenation. In this study, we evaluated the decrease in oxygen concentration in a model when using different strategies of oxygenation: using a special oxygenation laryngoscope, nasal oxygen, nasal high flow oxygen, and control. METHODS: In this experimental study we compared no oxygen application as a control, standard pure oxygen application of 10 l·min- 1 via nasal cannula, high flow 90% oxygen application at 20 l·min- 1 using a special nasal high flow device, and pure oxygen application via our oxygenation laryngoscope at 10 l·min- 1. We preoxygenated a simulation lung to 97% oxygen concentration and connected this to the trachea of a manikin model simulating apnoeic oxygenation. Decrease in oxygen concentration in the simulation lung was measured continuously for 20 min. RESULTS: Oxygen concentration in the simulation lung dropped from 97 ± 1% at baseline to 40 ± 1% in the no oxygen group, to 80 ± 1% in the standard nasal oxygen group, and to 73 ± 2% in the high flow nasal oxygenation group. However, it remained at 96 ± 0% in the oxygenation laryngoscope group (p < 0.001 between all groups). CONCLUSIONS: In this technical simulation, oxygenation via oxygenation laryngoscope was more effective than standard oxygen insufflation via nasal cannula, which was more effective than nasal high flow insufflation of 90% oxygen.
BACKGROUND: Failed airway management is the major contributor for anaesthesia-related morbidity and mortality. Cannot-intubate-cannot-ventilate scenarios are the most critical emergency in airway management, and belong to the worst imaginable scenarios in an anaesthetist's life. In such situations, apnoeic oxygenation might be useful to avoid hypoxaemia. Anaesthesia guidelines recommend careful preoxygenation and application of high flow oxygen in difficult intubation scenarios to prevent episodes of deoxygenation. In this study, we evaluated the decrease in oxygen concentration in a model when using different strategies of oxygenation: using a special oxygenation laryngoscope, nasal oxygen, nasal high flow oxygen, and control. METHODS: In this experimental study we compared no oxygen application as a control, standard pure oxygen application of 10 l·min- 1 via nasal cannula, high flow 90% oxygen application at 20 l·min- 1 using a special nasal high flow device, and pure oxygen application via our oxygenation laryngoscope at 10 l·min- 1. We preoxygenated a simulation lung to 97% oxygen concentration and connected this to the trachea of a manikin model simulating apnoeic oxygenation. Decrease in oxygen concentration in the simulation lung was measured continuously for 20 min. RESULTS:Oxygen concentration in the simulation lung dropped from 97 ± 1% at baseline to 40 ± 1% in the no oxygen group, to 80 ± 1% in the standard nasal oxygen group, and to 73 ± 2% in the high flow nasal oxygenation group. However, it remained at 96 ± 0% in the oxygenation laryngoscope group (p < 0.001 between all groups). CONCLUSIONS: In this technical simulation, oxygenation via oxygenation laryngoscope was more effective than standard oxygeninsufflation via nasal cannula, which was more effective than nasal high flow insufflation of 90% oxygen.
Authors: A S Baraka; S K Taha; S M Siddik-Sayyid; G E Kanazi; M F El-Khatib; C M Dagher; J-M A Chehade; F W Abdallah; R E Hajj Journal: Anaesthesia Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 6.955
Authors: Matthew W Semler; David R Janz; Robert J Lentz; Daniel T Matthews; Brett C Norman; Tufik R Assad; Raj D Keriwala; Benjamin A Ferrell; Michael J Noto; Andrew C McKown; Emily G Kocurek; Melissa A Warren; Luis E Huerta; Todd W Rice Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2016-02-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Thomas Mitterlechner; Holger Herff; Christian W Hammel; Patrick Braun; Peter Paal; Volker Wenzel; Arnulf Benzer Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2014-10-11 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: Wolfgang A Wetsch; Daniel C Schroeder; Simon-Richard Finke; David Sander; Hannes Ecker; Bernd W Böttiger; Holger Herff Journal: Med Gas Res Date: 2022 Jan-Mar