Intraoperative Gastric Tube Intubation: A Summary of Case Studies and Review of the Literature.

Michael Long, Melissa Machan, Luis Tollinche
{"title":"Intraoperative Gastric Tube Intubation: A Summary of Case Studies and Review of the Literature.","authors":"Michael Long,&nbsp;Melissa Machan,&nbsp;Luis Tollinche","doi":"10.4236/ojanes.2017.73005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study objective: </strong>Establish complications and risk factors that are associated with blind tube insertion, evaluate the validity of correct placement verification methods, establish the rationales supporting its employment by anesthesia providers, and describe various deployment facilitators described in current literature.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>An exhaustive literature review of the databases Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane Collaboration, Scopus, and Google Scholar was performed applying the search terms \"gastric tube\", \"complications\", \"decompression\", \"blind insertion\", \"perioperative\", \"intraoperative\" in various order sequences. A five-year limit was applied to limit the number and timeliness of articles selected.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>Patients are exposed to potentially serious morbidity and mortality from blindly inserted gastric tubes. Risk factors associated with malposition include blind insertion, the presence of endotracheal tubes, altered sensorium, and previous tube misplacements. Pulmonary aspiration risk prevention remains the only indication for anesthesia-related intraoperative use. There are no singularly effective tools that predict or verify the proper placement of blindly inserted gastric tubes. Current placement facilitation techniques are perpetuated through anecdotal experience and technique variability warrants further study.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the absence of aspiration risk factors or the need for surgical decompression in ASA classification I & II patients, a moratorium should be instituted on the elective use of gastric tubes.</p>","PeriodicalId":56551,"journal":{"name":"麻醉学期刊(英文)","volume":"7 3","pages":"43-62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4236/ojanes.2017.73005","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"麻醉学期刊(英文)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/ojanes.2017.73005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Study objective: Establish complications and risk factors that are associated with blind tube insertion, evaluate the validity of correct placement verification methods, establish the rationales supporting its employment by anesthesia providers, and describe various deployment facilitators described in current literature.

Measurements: An exhaustive literature review of the databases Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane Collaboration, Scopus, and Google Scholar was performed applying the search terms "gastric tube", "complications", "decompression", "blind insertion", "perioperative", "intraoperative" in various order sequences. A five-year limit was applied to limit the number and timeliness of articles selected.

Main results: Patients are exposed to potentially serious morbidity and mortality from blindly inserted gastric tubes. Risk factors associated with malposition include blind insertion, the presence of endotracheal tubes, altered sensorium, and previous tube misplacements. Pulmonary aspiration risk prevention remains the only indication for anesthesia-related intraoperative use. There are no singularly effective tools that predict or verify the proper placement of blindly inserted gastric tubes. Current placement facilitation techniques are perpetuated through anecdotal experience and technique variability warrants further study.

Conclusion: In the absence of aspiration risk factors or the need for surgical decompression in ASA classification I & II patients, a moratorium should be instituted on the elective use of gastric tubes.

Abstract Image

术中胃管插管:个案研究总结及文献回顾。
研究目的:建立与盲管置入相关的并发症和危险因素,评估正确置入验证方法的有效性,建立支持麻醉提供者使用盲管的理由,并描述当前文献中描述的各种部署促进因素。测量方法:对Medline、CINAHL、Cochrane Collaboration、Scopus和Google Scholar数据库进行了详尽的文献综述,按照不同的顺序搜索关键词“胃管”、“并发症”、“减压”、“盲插入”、“围手术期”、“术中”。对所选文章的数量和时效性实行五年限制。主要结果:盲目插入胃管的患者有潜在的严重发病率和死亡率。与位置错位相关的危险因素包括盲目插入、气管内导管的存在、感觉改变和以前的导管错位。预防肺误吸风险仍然是麻醉相关术中使用的唯一指征。目前还没有特别有效的工具来预测或验证盲目插入胃管的正确放置。目前的安置促进技术是通过轶事经验延续下来的,技术的可变性值得进一步研究。结论:ASA I和II级患者在没有误吸危险因素或需要手术减压的情况下,应暂停选择性使用胃管。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
371
×
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