OBJECTIVE: Mask ventilation can be difficult in elderly edentulous patients. Various solutions have been proposed to address this challenge. This study assessed the use of a new airway-securing device called the Tulip Airway and investigated its application in simulated edentulous patients. METHODS: This pilot study utilized a modified edentulous airway training mannequin and a high-performance simulator. Participants attempted to ventilate the edentulous mannequin using a Guedel oropharyngeal airway and face mask (M method) or the Tulip Airway (T method). Successful inflation of the mannequin model lung was confirmed visually. The time required for the insertion of the Tulip Airway was also assessed. A high-performance simulator was then used to compare ventilation volumes achieved using the M and T methods, and data subsequently analyzed. RESULTS: In the edentulous mannequin, lung inflation was not achieved by any participants using the M method, but all were successful using the T method. Insertion time for the Tulip Airway was ∼8 seconds. Median ventilation volumes achieved using the high-performance simulator were higher for the T method (308 mL) compared with the M method (192 mL; P < .05). CONCLUSION: The results of this pilot study indicate that the Tulip Airway is an effective airway device for use in edentulous patients with difficult mask ventilation.
OBJECTIVE: Mask ventilation can be difficult in elderly edentulous patients. Various solutions have been proposed to address this challenge. This study assessed the use of a new airway-securing device called the Tulip Airway and investigated its application in simulated edentulous patients. METHODS: This pilot study utilized a modified edentulous airway training mannequin and a high-performance simulator. Participants attempted to ventilate the edentulous mannequin using a Guedel oropharyngeal airway and face mask (M method) or the Tulip Airway (T method). Successful inflation of the mannequin model lung was confirmed visually. The time required for the insertion of the Tulip Airway was also assessed. A high-performance simulator was then used to compare ventilation volumes achieved using the M and T methods, and data subsequently analyzed. RESULTS: In the edentulous mannequin, lung inflation was not achieved by any participants using the M method, but all were successful using the T method. Insertion time for the Tulip Airway was ∼8 seconds. Median ventilation volumes achieved using the high-performance simulator were higher for the T method (308 mL) compared with the M method (192 mL; P < .05). CONCLUSION: The results of this pilot study indicate that the Tulip Airway is an effective airway device for use in edentulous patients with difficult mask ventilation.
Authors: Sachin Kheterpal; Richard Han; Kevin K Tremper; Amy Shanks; Alan R Tait; Michael O'Reilly; Thomas A Ludwig Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Stéphane X Racine; Audrey Solis; Nora Ait Hamou; Philippe Letoumelin; David L Hepner; Sadek Beloucif; Christophe Baillard Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 7.892