evaluation of simple pre-determined length insertion technique (split) with conventional method for oral fibreoptic intubation: a randomised cross-over study
Clicks: 116
ID: 216355
2017
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Improving Quality
0.0
/100
Combines engagement data with AI-assessed academic quality
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
0.3
/100
1 views
1 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Abstract
Background and Aims: The difficulty during flexible fiber-optic bronchoscopy (FOB) guided tracheal intubation could be because of inability in visualising glottis, advancing and railroading of endotracheal tube. Several methods are available for visualising glottis, but none is ideal. Hence, this randomised controlled study was designed to evaluate the simple pre-determined length insertion technique (SPLIT) during oral FOB. Methods: Fifty-eight patients were randomised into Group C and Group P. General anaesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane and oxygen in spontaneous respiration. In Group C, conventional flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy was done followed by SPLIT and vice versa in Group P. The time to visualise the glottis (T1), from glottic visualisation to pass beyond glottis (T2) and from incisors to pass beyond the glottis (T3) were noted from the recorded video. The time interval was analysed using Wilcoxon matched pairs test and Mann–Whitney U-test. Results: The T1was significantly less in SPLIT as compared to conventional technique (13 [10, 20.25] vs. 33 [22, 48] s). The T3was significantly less in SPLIT (24.5 [19.75, 30] vs. 44 [34, 61.25] s). The T1by SPLIT was comparable between residents and consultants (P = 0.09), whereas it was significantly more among residents than the conventional technique. The SPLIT was preferred by 91.3% anaesthesiologists. Conclusion: The SPLIT significantly lessened the time to visualise the glottis than conventional technique for FOB. The SPLIT was the preferred technique. Hence, we suggest using the SPLIT to secure the airway at the earliest and also as an alternative to conventional technique.Reference Key |
muthukumar2017indianevaluation
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
---|---|
Authors | ;Elangovan Muthukumar;Lenin Babu Elakkumanan;Prasanna Udupi Bidkar;MVS Satyaprakash;Sandeep Kumar Mishra |
Journal | Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association |
Year | 2017 |
DOI | 10.4103/0019-5049.198398 |
URL | |
Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.