下颌轮廓角或翼状骨间距离能否提供一种预测困难喉镜检查的新方法?

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
E Sule Ozdemir Sezgi, M Murat Sayin, Savaş Altinsoy
{"title":"下颌轮廓角或翼状骨间距离能否提供一种预测困难喉镜检查的新方法?","authors":"E Sule Ozdemir Sezgi, M Murat Sayin, Savaş Altinsoy","doi":"10.23736/S0375-9393.25.18712-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Various tests have been developed to predict difficult airway during preoperative examination, but none has presented an adequate degree of accuracy. This study investigates novel mandibular structures and angles for evaluation as potential predictor of difficult laryngoscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following Ethics Committee approval, 1001 patients scheduled for elective surgeries under general anesthesia with oral intubation were included in this prospective study. Difficult laryngoscopy was defined as a Cormack-Lehane grade III or IV view. Standard predictive tests - including neck circumference, thyromental distance, sternomental distance, Modified Mallampati Test (MMT), mouth opening, and upper lip bite test - were evaluated alongside two novel parameters: the \"mandibular profile angle\" and \"inter-pterygoid distance.\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sensitivity and specificity of the Modified Mallampati Test (MMT) for predicting difficult laryngoscopy were 46% and 91%, respectively, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 51% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 89%. In contrast, the \"mandibular profile angle\" demonstrated a sensitivity of 83%, specificity of 86%, PPV of 55%, and NPV of 96%. The \"inter-pterygoid distance\" showed similar accuracy, with a sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 88%, PPV of 58%, and NPV of 96%. The area under the curve (AUC) values were 0.89 for the \"mandibular profile angle\" and 0.90 for the \"inter-pterygoid distance.\" The optimal cut-off for predicting difficult laryngoscopy was 107.75° for the \"mandibular profile angle\" and 13.05 cm for the \"inter-pterygoid distance.\"</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings suggest that using mandibular structures in preoperative assessments to anticipate and prepare for difficult laryngoscopy scenarios provides reliable threshold values that may improve patient safety and procedural outcomes. The introduction of novel measurements, specific to mandibular structure assessment, carries the potential to initiate a distinct approach in predicting difficult laryngoscopy. By integrating these measurements with existing bedside tests, a substantial enhancement in the accuracy and robustness of predictive evaluations may be reached.</p>","PeriodicalId":18522,"journal":{"name":"Minerva anestesiologica","volume":"91 9","pages":"766-775"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Could mandibular profile angle or inter-pterygoid distance provide a novel method for predicting difficult laryngoscopy?\",\"authors\":\"E Sule Ozdemir Sezgi, M Murat Sayin, Savaş Altinsoy\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S0375-9393.25.18712-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Various tests have been developed to predict difficult airway during preoperative examination, but none has presented an adequate degree of accuracy. This study investigates novel mandibular structures and angles for evaluation as potential predictor of difficult laryngoscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following Ethics Committee approval, 1001 patients scheduled for elective surgeries under general anesthesia with oral intubation were included in this prospective study. Difficult laryngoscopy was defined as a Cormack-Lehane grade III or IV view. Standard predictive tests - including neck circumference, thyromental distance, sternomental distance, Modified Mallampati Test (MMT), mouth opening, and upper lip bite test - were evaluated alongside two novel parameters: the \\\"mandibular profile angle\\\" and \\\"inter-pterygoid distance.\\\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sensitivity and specificity of the Modified Mallampati Test (MMT) for predicting difficult laryngoscopy were 46% and 91%, respectively, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 51% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 89%. In contrast, the \\\"mandibular profile angle\\\" demonstrated a sensitivity of 83%, specificity of 86%, PPV of 55%, and NPV of 96%. The \\\"inter-pterygoid distance\\\" showed similar accuracy, with a sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 88%, PPV of 58%, and NPV of 96%. The area under the curve (AUC) values were 0.89 for the \\\"mandibular profile angle\\\" and 0.90 for the \\\"inter-pterygoid distance.\\\" The optimal cut-off for predicting difficult laryngoscopy was 107.75° for the \\\"mandibular profile angle\\\" and 13.05 cm for the \\\"inter-pterygoid distance.\\\"</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings suggest that using mandibular structures in preoperative assessments to anticipate and prepare for difficult laryngoscopy scenarios provides reliable threshold values that may improve patient safety and procedural outcomes. The introduction of novel measurements, specific to mandibular structure assessment, carries the potential to initiate a distinct approach in predicting difficult laryngoscopy. By integrating these measurements with existing bedside tests, a substantial enhancement in the accuracy and robustness of predictive evaluations may be reached.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva anestesiologica\",\"volume\":\"91 9\",\"pages\":\"766-775\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva anestesiologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0375-9393.25.18712-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva anestesiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0375-9393.25.18712-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在术前检查中,已经开发了各种各样的测试来预测气道困难,但没有一种表现出足够的准确性。本研究探讨新的下颌结构和角度,以评估喉镜检查困难的潜在预测因素。方法:经伦理委员会批准,1001例计划在全身麻醉下口服插管进行择期手术的患者纳入本前瞻性研究。困难喉镜检查定义为Cormack-Lehane III级或IV级。标准的预测试验——包括颈围、甲状腺距离、胸骨距离、改良Mallampati试验(MMT)、张嘴和上唇咬合试验——与两个新参数一起评估:“下颌轮廓角”和“翼状骨间距离”。结果:改良Mallampati Test (MMT)预测喉镜困难的敏感性和特异性分别为46%和91%,阳性预测值为51%,阴性预测值为89%。相比之下,“下颌轮廓角”的敏感性为83%,特异性为86%,PPV为55%,NPV为96%。“翼状骨间距离”具有相似的准确性,敏感性为82%,特异性为88%,PPV为58%,NPV为96%。“下颌轮廓角”曲线下面积(AUC)值为0.89,“翼状骨间距离”曲线下面积为0.90。预测喉镜检查困难的最佳临界值为“下颌轮廓角”为107.75°,“翼状骨间距离”为13.05 cm。结论:这些发现表明,在术前评估中使用下颌结构来预测和准备困难的喉镜检查场景提供了可靠的阈值,可以提高患者的安全性和手术结果。引入新的测量方法,特别是对下颌结构的评估,有可能在预测困难的喉镜检查中开创一种独特的方法。通过将这些测量与现有的床边试验相结合,可以大大提高预测评估的准确性和稳健性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Could mandibular profile angle or inter-pterygoid distance provide a novel method for predicting difficult laryngoscopy?

Background: Various tests have been developed to predict difficult airway during preoperative examination, but none has presented an adequate degree of accuracy. This study investigates novel mandibular structures and angles for evaluation as potential predictor of difficult laryngoscopy.

Methods: Following Ethics Committee approval, 1001 patients scheduled for elective surgeries under general anesthesia with oral intubation were included in this prospective study. Difficult laryngoscopy was defined as a Cormack-Lehane grade III or IV view. Standard predictive tests - including neck circumference, thyromental distance, sternomental distance, Modified Mallampati Test (MMT), mouth opening, and upper lip bite test - were evaluated alongside two novel parameters: the "mandibular profile angle" and "inter-pterygoid distance."

Results: The sensitivity and specificity of the Modified Mallampati Test (MMT) for predicting difficult laryngoscopy were 46% and 91%, respectively, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 51% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 89%. In contrast, the "mandibular profile angle" demonstrated a sensitivity of 83%, specificity of 86%, PPV of 55%, and NPV of 96%. The "inter-pterygoid distance" showed similar accuracy, with a sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 88%, PPV of 58%, and NPV of 96%. The area under the curve (AUC) values were 0.89 for the "mandibular profile angle" and 0.90 for the "inter-pterygoid distance." The optimal cut-off for predicting difficult laryngoscopy was 107.75° for the "mandibular profile angle" and 13.05 cm for the "inter-pterygoid distance."

Conclusions: These findings suggest that using mandibular structures in preoperative assessments to anticipate and prepare for difficult laryngoscopy scenarios provides reliable threshold values that may improve patient safety and procedural outcomes. The introduction of novel measurements, specific to mandibular structure assessment, carries the potential to initiate a distinct approach in predicting difficult laryngoscopy. By integrating these measurements with existing bedside tests, a substantial enhancement in the accuracy and robustness of predictive evaluations may be reached.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Minerva anestesiologica
Minerva anestesiologica 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
367
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Minerva Anestesiologica is the journal of the Italian National Society of Anaesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care. Minerva Anestesiologica publishes scientific papers on Anesthesiology, Intensive care, Analgesia, Perioperative Medicine and related fields. Manuscripts are expected to comply with the instructions to authors which conform to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Editors by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信