Stephanie C DeMasi, Jonathan D Casey, Matthew W Semler
{"title":"Evidence-based Emergency Tracheal Intubation.","authors":"Stephanie C DeMasi, Jonathan D Casey, Matthew W Semler","doi":"10.1164/rccm.202411-2165CI","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Millions of critically ill adults undergo tracheal intubation in an emergency department or intensive care unit each year, nearly 40% of whom experience hypoxemia, hypotension, or cardiac arrest during the procedure. Over the last two decades, a series of randomized trials have evaluated the tools, techniques, devices, and drugs used to perform emergency tracheal intubation to determine which interventions improve outcomes and which are ineffective or harmful. Results of these trials have demonstrated that: preoxygenation with noninvasive ventilation and administration of positive pressure ventilation between induction and laryngoscopy prevent hypoxemia during intubation; video laryngoscopy facilitates successful intubation on the first attempt and may prevent esophageal intubation; use of a stylet is superior to intubation with an endotracheal tube alone and is comparable to use of a bougie; and administration of a fluid bolus before induction does not prevent hypotension. Many additional decisions clinicians face during emergency tracheal intubation are not yet informed by rigorous evidence. Randomized trials must continue to examine systematically each aspect of this common and high-risk procedure to improve patient outcomes and bring forth an era of evidence-based emergency tracheal intubation. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).</p>","PeriodicalId":7664,"journal":{"name":"American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":19.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.202411-2165CI","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Millions of critically ill adults undergo tracheal intubation in an emergency department or intensive care unit each year, nearly 40% of whom experience hypoxemia, hypotension, or cardiac arrest during the procedure. Over the last two decades, a series of randomized trials have evaluated the tools, techniques, devices, and drugs used to perform emergency tracheal intubation to determine which interventions improve outcomes and which are ineffective or harmful. Results of these trials have demonstrated that: preoxygenation with noninvasive ventilation and administration of positive pressure ventilation between induction and laryngoscopy prevent hypoxemia during intubation; video laryngoscopy facilitates successful intubation on the first attempt and may prevent esophageal intubation; use of a stylet is superior to intubation with an endotracheal tube alone and is comparable to use of a bougie; and administration of a fluid bolus before induction does not prevent hypotension. Many additional decisions clinicians face during emergency tracheal intubation are not yet informed by rigorous evidence. Randomized trials must continue to examine systematically each aspect of this common and high-risk procedure to improve patient outcomes and bring forth an era of evidence-based emergency tracheal intubation. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine focuses on human biology and disease, as well as animal studies that contribute to the understanding of pathophysiology and treatment of diseases that affect the respiratory system and critically ill patients. Papers that are solely or predominantly based in cell and molecular biology are published in the companion journal, the American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology. The Journal also seeks to publish clinical trials and outstanding review articles on areas of interest in several forms. The State-of-the-Art review is a treatise usually covering a broad field that brings bench research to the bedside. Shorter reviews are published as Critical Care Perspectives or Pulmonary Perspectives. These are generally focused on a more limited area and advance a concerted opinion about care for a specific process. Concise Clinical Reviews provide an evidence-based synthesis of the literature pertaining to topics of fundamental importance to the practice of pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. Images providing advances or unusual contributions to the field are published as Images in Pulmonary, Critical Care, Sleep Medicine and the Sciences.
A recent trend and future direction of the Journal has been to include debates of a topical nature on issues of importance in pulmonary and critical care medicine and to the membership of the American Thoracic Society. Other recent changes have included encompassing works from the field of critical care medicine and the extension of the editorial governing of journal policy to colleagues outside of the United States of America. The focus and direction of the Journal is to establish an international forum for state-of-the-art respiratory and critical care medicine.