Search

Objective: With the increasing spread of laryngeal tubes (LT) in emergency medicine, complications and side-effects are observed. We sought to identify complications associated with the use of LTs in emergency medicine, and to develop strategies to prevent these incidents., Methods: In a prospective clinical study, all patients who had their airways managed in the field with a LT and who were admitted through the emergency department of the Frankfurt University Hospital during a 6 year period were evaluated using anonymised data collection sheets. A team of experts was available 24/7 and was requested whenever a patient was admitted with a LT in place. This team evaluated the condition of the patients with respect to prehospital airway management and was responsible for further advanced airway management. All complications were analysed, and strategies for prevention developed., Results: One hundred eighty nine patients were included and analysed. The initial cuff pressure of the LTs was 10 0 cm H₂O on the median. Complications consisted of significant tongue swelling (n=73; 38.6%), resulting in life-threatening cannot ventilate, cannot intubate scenarios in two patients (1.0%) and the need for surgical tracheostomy in another patient, massive distension of the stomach (n=20, 10.6%) with ventilation difficulties when LTs without gastric drainage were used; malposition of the LT in the piriform sinus (n=1, 0.5%) and significant bleeding from soft tissue injuries (n=4, 2.1%)., Conclusions: The prehospital use of LTs may result in severe and even life-threatening complications. Likely, such complications could have been prevented by using gastric drainage and cuff pressure adjustment. Both, prehospital health care providers and emergency department staff should develop a greater awareness of such complications to best avoid them in the future., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Difficult airway situations both expected and unexpected, present major challenges to every anesthesiologist, especially in pediatric anesthesia. However, the integration of extraglottic airway devices, such as the laryngeal mask, into the algorithm of difficult airways has improved the handling of difficult airway situations. A device for establishing a supraglottic airway, the laryngeal tube (LT), was introduced in 1999. The LT is an extraglottic airway designed to secure a patent airway during either spontaneous breathing or controlled ventilation. The design of the device has been revised several times and a further development is the LTS II/LTS-D, which provides an additional channel for the insertion of a gastric drain tube. This article reports on the successful use of the LTS II in 12 children aged from 2 days to 6 years when endotracheal intubation, alternative mask or laryngeal mask ventilation failed. Use of the LTS II was associated with a high level of success, securing the airway when other techniques had failed. The potential advantage of the LTS II over the standard LT is an additional suction port, which allows gastric tube placement and can be used as an indirect indicator of correct placement. With a modified insertion technique using an Esmarch manoeuvre, placement was simple and fast to perform. In emergency situations when direct laryngoscopy fails or is too time-consuming the LTS II tube is recommended as an alternative device to secure the airway. As with all extraglottic airway devices, familiarity and clinical experience with the respective device and the corresponding insertion technique are essential for safe and successful use, especially in emergency situations.

Concept: Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is considered to be the gold standard of prehospital airway management. However, ETI requires substantial technical skills and ongoing experience. Because failed prehospital ETI is common and associated with a higher mortality, reliable airway devices are needed to be used by rescuers less experienced in ETI. We prospectively evaluated the feasibility of laryngeal tubes used by paramedics and emergency physicians for out-of-hospital airway management., Material and Methods: During a 24-month period, all cases of prehospital use of the laryngeal tube disposable (LT-D) and laryngeal tube suction disposable (LTS-D) within five operational areas of emergency medical services were recorded by a standardised questionnaire. We determined indications for laryngeal tube use, placement success, number of placement attempts, placement time and personal level of experience., Results: Of 157 prehospital intubation attempts with the LT-D/LTS-D, 152 (96.8%) were successfully performed by paramedics (n=70) or emergency physicians (n=87). The device was used as initial airway (n=87) or rescue device after failed ETI (n=70). The placement time was < or =45s (n=120), 46-90s (n=20) and >90s (n=7). In five cases the time needed was not specified. The number of placement attempts was one (n=123), two (n=25), three (n=2) and more than three (n=2). The majority of users (61.1%) were relative novices with no more than five previous laryngeal tube placements., Conclusion: The LT-D/LTS-D represents a reliable tool for prehospital airway management in the hands of both paramedics and emergency physicians. It can be used as an initial tool to secure the airway until ETI is prepared, as a definitive airway by rescuers less experienced with ETI or as a rescue device when ETI has failed., (Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Difficult paediatric airways, both expected and unexpected, present major challenges to every anaesthesiologist, paediatrician and emergency physician. However, the integration of supraglottic airway devices, such as the laryngeal mask (LM), into the algorithm of difficult airways has improved the handling of difficult airway situations in patients. A recent device for establishing a supraglottic airway is the laryngeal tube, introduced in 1999. We report on the successful use of the laryngeal tube suction II (LTS II) in securing the airway when endotracheal intubation or alternative mask ventilation has failed., Methods: The use of the LTS II in 10 cases of difficult airway management in neonates and infants <6 months was reviewed., Results: Use of the LTS II was associated with a high level of success (100%), often rescuing the airway when other techniques had failed. All insertions were successful on first attempt using a modified insertion technique. Placement was classified as "easy" by all users., Conclusions: The potential advantage of the LTS II is the suction port which allows gastric tube placement and subsequent egression of gastric contents. In emergency situations when direct laryngoscopy fails, or is too time-consuming because of anatomical abnormalities, we recommend the LTS II tube as the first-line device to secure the airway. As with all supraglottic airways, familiarity and clinical experience with the respective device and its insertion technique is essential for safe and successful use, especially in emergencies.

Copyright of Anaesthesiologie & Intensivmedizin is the property of DGAI e.V. - Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Anasthesiologie und Intensivmedizin e.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Predicting and managing the difficult airway is a lifesaving and vital basic task for the anesthetist. Current guidelines of all important societies include thyromental distance (TMD, "Patil") as a possible predictor for a difficult airway and includes two important aspects for airway management: the mandibular space and the flexibility of the cervical spine. We evaluated knowledge and execution regarding TMD for predicting a difficult airway on participants at the Euroanaesthesia (ESA) congress and German Anaesthesia Congress (DAC) in 2014. Our evaluation consisted of a theoretical part with questions regarding general knowledge and a practical evaluation with anesthetists performing on a human airway model. Practical evaluations were performed separately from other participants. During the DAC 245 (ESA 230) physicians participated, of which 64% were male (ESA 58%). At the DAC 182 (74.3%) and ESA 82 (35.6%) participants knew about Patil/TMD. Its use as a predictive score for a difficult airway was known by 122 (49.8%; DAC) and 79 (34.4%; ESA) participants. The correct definition for intubation was given by 45 (25.7%) at the DAC and 56 (24.3%) at ESA. Only 40-41% of the participants measured the correct distance for TMD. Only 6.1-6.5% completed both the theoretical and practical parts correctly. As non-invasive TMD includes two different aspects of patient airways and is part of current guidelines, education and training must be extended to assure adequate evaluation in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In February 2013 the Committee of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Task Force published the amended version of the 'Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway' which replace the recommendations from 2003. The amended version re-evaluated the recommendations from 2003 in 2011, evaluated recently published studies and recommendations and included them in the new practice guidelines. In particular, new technical developments, such as the recently established video-assisted intubation procedure were taken into consideration. Despite the many publications in the field of airway management the evidence resulting from the data obtained from recent publications is so low that the new information does not necessitate any amendments to the existing guidelines. In short, the current guidelines basically correspond to the previous version published 10 years ago but are, however, more than twice as extensive. This article summarizes and comments on the cornerstones of the guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Anaesthesist is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Anaesthesist is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Der Chirurg is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Anaesthesist is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)