Randomized crossover trial comparing two open surgical cricothyrotomy techniques

Abstract

Objective

Emergency cricothyrotomy is a life-saving procedure that is performed in “can't intubate can't oxygenate” scenario. A recent study comparing an open surgical technique using a bougie and endotracheal tube (ETT) with a Seldinger technique using the Cook Melker catheter showed that the open technique was quicker but suggested that the open technique could be quicker if using the Melker catheter instead of a bougie and ETT. The objective of this study was to compare the surgical technique using bougie and ETT with an open technique using the Melker catheter.

Methods

A randomized crossover trial was conducted involving emergency physicians (EPs) and trainees. Participants performed both techniques in succession on an airway model, with the technique performed first being randomized for each participant. The primary outcome was time to first insufflation of the artificial lung. Participants also indicated their comfort with each technique on a 5-point Likert scale and which technique they preferred.

Results

Seventeen EPs and 19 trainees participated. The Melker catheter technique was performed quicker with a mean time of 29.2 s versus 44.3 s for the bougie/ETT technique (difference 15.1 s, 95% confidence interval 10.8–19.4 s). The Melker catheter was most preferred by participants (61% vs. 39%). There was no significant difference in the comfort ratings between each technique. Time to model lung insufflation was not affected by training level or time since last performed a cricothyrotomy, either real or simulated.

Conclusions

The Melker catheter was quicker to perform and the most preferred by participants.