Comparison of Acromio-Axillo-Suprasternal Notch Index (AASI) with Hyomental Distance Ratio Test (HMDR) in Predicting Difficult Visualization of the Larynx.

Q3 Medicine
Tanaffos Pub Date : 2024-02-01
Alireza Jaffari, Homayoun Aghamohammadi, Mahdis Hamedi, Mohammad Reza Kamranmanesh, Parisa Sezari, Kamran Mottaghi
{"title":"Comparison of Acromio-Axillo-Suprasternal Notch Index (AASI) with Hyomental Distance Ratio Test (HMDR) in Predicting Difficult Visualization of the Larynx.","authors":"Alireza Jaffari, Homayoun Aghamohammadi, Mahdis Hamedi, Mohammad Reza Kamranmanesh, Parisa Sezari, Kamran Mottaghi","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Safe airway management during anesthesia induction is a challenging issue. Airway-related morbidity can be prevented by carefully evaluating patients and formulating a difficult airway management strategy. The purpose of this study is to investigate and compare two indices, AASI, and HMDR, in predicting difficult laryngoscopic visualization.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Six hundred and twenty-two patients, who entered the operating room for any type of elective surgery and were candidates for general anesthesia, underwent AASI and HMDR measurements after filling out a questionnaire containing personal information, oral examinations, and history of illness or surgery before anesthesia prescription. The Cormack grade was recorded during laryngoscopy, and finally, the predictive value of the two methods was compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Based on analysis, AASI has a higher specificity than HDMR (87.5% vs. 76.1%) and the positive predictive value of AASI is 97%. Therefore, both HMDR and AASI are valid and significant indicators for predicting difficult laryngoscopy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>AASI has a better diagnostic profile than HMDR regarding sensitivity and positive predictive value, Additionally, AASI is more convenient to use because it is simpler and visually predictable, making it a reliable clinical predictor.</p>","PeriodicalId":22247,"journal":{"name":"Tanaffos","volume":"23 2","pages":"163-169"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11825070/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tanaffos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Safe airway management during anesthesia induction is a challenging issue. Airway-related morbidity can be prevented by carefully evaluating patients and formulating a difficult airway management strategy. The purpose of this study is to investigate and compare two indices, AASI, and HMDR, in predicting difficult laryngoscopic visualization.

Materials and methods: Six hundred and twenty-two patients, who entered the operating room for any type of elective surgery and were candidates for general anesthesia, underwent AASI and HMDR measurements after filling out a questionnaire containing personal information, oral examinations, and history of illness or surgery before anesthesia prescription. The Cormack grade was recorded during laryngoscopy, and finally, the predictive value of the two methods was compared.

Results: Based on analysis, AASI has a higher specificity than HDMR (87.5% vs. 76.1%) and the positive predictive value of AASI is 97%. Therefore, both HMDR and AASI are valid and significant indicators for predicting difficult laryngoscopy.

Conclusion: AASI has a better diagnostic profile than HMDR regarding sensitivity and positive predictive value, Additionally, AASI is more convenient to use because it is simpler and visually predictable, making it a reliable clinical predictor.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Tanaffos
Tanaffos Medicine-Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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