Endotracheal tube cuff pressure assessment: expectations versus reality.

IF 1.6 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Valentyn Sadovyi, Iurii Kuchyn, Kateryna Bielka, Vasyl Horoshko, Dmytro Sazhyn, Liubov Sokolova
{"title":"Endotracheal tube cuff pressure assessment: expectations versus reality.","authors":"Valentyn Sadovyi, Iurii Kuchyn, Kateryna Bielka, Vasyl Horoshko, Dmytro Sazhyn, Liubov Sokolova","doi":"10.5114/ait.2024.145411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Damage to the trachea, although rare, is a serious complication in anesthesiology and intensive care. The main mechanism of such injury is a direct mechanical action associated with excessive pressure in the cuff of the endotracheal tube (ETT). The aim of the study was to evaluate the actual pressure in the cuffs during surgical interventions, correlate this measure with the subjective assessment of the anesthesiologist, and compare different methods of inflating the ETT cuff.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ninety patients were randomly divided into two equal groups. In the study group, the \"minimum leakage\" technique was used to inflate the cuff. In the control group, the adequacy of pressure was determined by palpation of the cuff balloon. In both groups, the actual pressure was then measured using a mechanical manometer connected to the cuff.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average ETT cuff pressure was 30.4 ± 4.9 cmH 2 O (2.98 ± 0.48 kPa) in the study group and 68.9 ± 23.3 cmH 2 O (6.75 ± 2.28 kPa) in the control group. The pressure in the ETT cuffs was within the standard safe range (i.e. 20-30 cmH 2 O) in 2/45 (4.4%) and 23/45 (51.1%) patients in the control and the study group, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the majority of cases, the pressure achieved via evaluation by the me-thod of palpation of the control cuff was not adequate. Among various non-mechanical methods of measuring and controlling pressure in the cuff of the intubation tube, the minimum occlusion volume technique deserves attention.</p>","PeriodicalId":7750,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesiology intensive therapy","volume":"56 4","pages":"241-245"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11736906/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesiology intensive therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/ait.2024.145411","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Damage to the trachea, although rare, is a serious complication in anesthesiology and intensive care. The main mechanism of such injury is a direct mechanical action associated with excessive pressure in the cuff of the endotracheal tube (ETT). The aim of the study was to evaluate the actual pressure in the cuffs during surgical interventions, correlate this measure with the subjective assessment of the anesthesiologist, and compare different methods of inflating the ETT cuff.

Methods: Ninety patients were randomly divided into two equal groups. In the study group, the "minimum leakage" technique was used to inflate the cuff. In the control group, the adequacy of pressure was determined by palpation of the cuff balloon. In both groups, the actual pressure was then measured using a mechanical manometer connected to the cuff.

Results: The average ETT cuff pressure was 30.4 ± 4.9 cmH 2 O (2.98 ± 0.48 kPa) in the study group and 68.9 ± 23.3 cmH 2 O (6.75 ± 2.28 kPa) in the control group. The pressure in the ETT cuffs was within the standard safe range (i.e. 20-30 cmH 2 O) in 2/45 (4.4%) and 23/45 (51.1%) patients in the control and the study group, respectively.

Conclusions: In the majority of cases, the pressure achieved via evaluation by the me-thod of palpation of the control cuff was not adequate. Among various non-mechanical methods of measuring and controlling pressure in the cuff of the intubation tube, the minimum occlusion volume technique deserves attention.

气管插管袖带压力评估:期望与现实。
背景:气管损伤虽然罕见,但在麻醉和重症监护中是一种严重的并发症。这种损伤的主要机制是与气管内套管(ETT)袖带压力过大相关的直接机械作用。本研究的目的是评估手术干预期间袖带的实际压力,将该测量与麻醉师的主观评估相关联,并比较不同的ETT袖带充气方法。方法:90例患者随机分为两组。在研究组中,使用“最小泄漏”技术给袖带充气。在对照组中,通过触诊袖带气囊来确定压力是否充足。在两组中,使用连接到袖带的机械压力计测量实际压力。结果:研究组ETT袖带平均压力为30.4±4.9 cmh2o(2.98±0.48 kPa),对照组平均压力为68.9±23.3 cmh2o(6.75±2.28 kPa)。对照组和研究组分别有2/45(4.4%)和23/45(51.1%)患者的ETT袖口压力在标准安全范围内(即20-30 cmh2o)。结论:在大多数情况下,通过触诊控制袖带的方法评估获得的压力是不够的。在各种非机械测量和控制插管袖口压力的方法中,最小闭塞量技术值得关注。
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
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
48
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
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