A randomized comparison of three intubation techniques/tube materials for nasotracheal intubation.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Jiwon Lee, Jung-Man Lee, Yon Hee Shim, Joung Goo Cho, Jimin Lee, Jae-Yol Lim, Chul Ho Chang
{"title":"A randomized comparison of three intubation techniques/tube materials for nasotracheal intubation.","authors":"Jiwon Lee, Jung-Man Lee, Yon Hee Shim, Joung Goo Cho, Jimin Lee, Jae-Yol Lim, Chul Ho Chang","doi":"10.1007/s12630-024-02743-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We sought to compare three intubation methods using different intubation techniques/tube materials for tube advancement from the nasal cavity into the oral cavity during nasotracheal intubation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a randomized clinical trial with adult patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery requiring nasotracheal intubation for general anesthesia. Participants were randomly allocated to a polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tube group (group P), PVC tube attached to a rubber catheter group (group PR), or velvet-soft PVC tube group (group V). Tracheal intubation was then performed based on group allocation. The primary outcome was the first-attempt success rate of tube advancement into the oral cavity; secondary outcomes included the time required for tube advancement into the oral cavity, total intubation time, and the incidence of epistaxis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 149 patients were included in the study. The first-attempt success rate in group V (90%) was significantly higher than that in group P (58%) (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2 to 19.2), but similar to that in group PR (100%). The mean (standard deviation) time required for tube advancement into the oral cavity was significantly shorter in group V (16 [13] sec) than in group PR [40 (10) sec; 95% CI of mean difference, 17 to 30] and group P (26 [16] sec; 95% CI of mean difference, 3 to 16). Total intubation time was longest in group PR. Epistaxis occurred the least in group V.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Among the three intubation techniques/tube materials for nasotracheal intubation, the velvet-soft PVC tube provided the highest first-attempt success rate, most expeditious advancement into the oral cavity, and lowest incidence of epistaxis.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04695444); first submitted 30 December 2020.</p>","PeriodicalId":56145,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-024-02743-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We sought to compare three intubation methods using different intubation techniques/tube materials for tube advancement from the nasal cavity into the oral cavity during nasotracheal intubation.

Methods: We conducted a randomized clinical trial with adult patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery requiring nasotracheal intubation for general anesthesia. Participants were randomly allocated to a polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tube group (group P), PVC tube attached to a rubber catheter group (group PR), or velvet-soft PVC tube group (group V). Tracheal intubation was then performed based on group allocation. The primary outcome was the first-attempt success rate of tube advancement into the oral cavity; secondary outcomes included the time required for tube advancement into the oral cavity, total intubation time, and the incidence of epistaxis.

Results: A total of 149 patients were included in the study. The first-attempt success rate in group V (90%) was significantly higher than that in group P (58%) (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2 to 19.2), but similar to that in group PR (100%). The mean (standard deviation) time required for tube advancement into the oral cavity was significantly shorter in group V (16 [13] sec) than in group PR [40 (10) sec; 95% CI of mean difference, 17 to 30] and group P (26 [16] sec; 95% CI of mean difference, 3 to 16). Total intubation time was longest in group PR. Epistaxis occurred the least in group V.

Conclusions: Among the three intubation techniques/tube materials for nasotracheal intubation, the velvet-soft PVC tube provided the highest first-attempt success rate, most expeditious advancement into the oral cavity, and lowest incidence of epistaxis.

Study registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04695444); first submitted 30 December 2020.

Abstract Image

三种鼻气管插管技术/插管材料的随机比较。
目的:我们试图比较鼻气管插管时使用不同插管技术/插管材料将插管从鼻腔推进口腔的三种插管方法:我们对计划接受需要鼻气管插管全身麻醉的择期手术的成年患者进行了随机临床试验。参与者被随机分配到聚氯乙烯(PVC)管组(P 组)、连接橡胶导管的 PVC 管组(PR 组)或天鹅绒软 PVC 管组(V 组)。然后根据分组情况进行气管插管。主要结果是首次尝试将导管推进口腔的成功率;次要结果包括将导管推进口腔所需的时间、插管总时间和鼻衄发生率:共有 149 名患者参与了研究。V 组的首次尝试成功率(90%)明显高于 P 组(58%)(几率比 6.5;95% 置信区间 [CI],2.2 至 19.2),但与 PR 组(100%)相似。插管推进到口腔所需的平均(标准偏差)时间,V 组(16 [13] 秒)明显短于 PR 组(40 (10) 秒;95% 置信区间的平均差异为 17 至 30)和 P 组(26 [16] 秒;95% 置信区间的平均差异为 3 至 16)。PR 组的总插管时间最长。结论:结论:在鼻气管插管的三种插管技术/插管材料中,天鹅绒软 PVC 插管的首次尝试成功率最高,进入口腔的速度最快,鼻衄发生率最低:研究注册:ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04695444);首次提交日期:2020 年 12 月 30 日。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
161
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Anesthesia (the Journal) is owned by the Canadian Anesthesiologists’ Society and is published by Springer Science + Business Media, LLM (New York). From the first year of publication in 1954, the international exposure of the Journal has broadened considerably, with articles now received from over 50 countries. The Journal is published monthly, and has an impact Factor (mean journal citation frequency) of 2.127 (in 2012). Article types consist of invited editorials, reports of original investigations (clinical and basic sciences articles), case reports/case series, review articles, systematic reviews, accredited continuing professional development (CPD) modules, and Letters to the Editor. The editorial content, according to the mission statement, spans the fields of anesthesia, acute and chronic pain, perioperative medicine and critical care. In addition, the Journal publishes practice guidelines and standards articles relevant to clinicians. Articles are published either in English or in French, according to the language of submission.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信