Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
ABSTRACT
Background: Because algorithms for difficult airway management, including the use of new optical tracheal intubation
devices, require prospective evaluation in routine practice, we
prospectively assessed an algorithm for difficult airway
management that included two new airway devices.
Methods: After 6 months of instruction, training, and clin-ical
testing, 15 senior anesthesiologists were asked to use an
established algorithm for difficult airway management in
anesthetized and paralyzed patients. Abdominal, gyneco-logic,
and thyroid surgery patients were enrolled. Emer-gency,
obstetric, and patients considered at risk of aspiration were
excluded. If tracheal intubation using a Macintosh
laryngoscope was impossible, the Airtraq laryngoscope
(VYGON, Ecouen, France) was recommended as a first step
and the LMA CTrach (SEBAC, Pantin, France) as a sec* Assistant Professor, Staff Anesthesiologist,
Professor and Head of Department, Jean Verdier
University Hospital of Paris, Anaesthesia and Intensive
Care Unit Department, Bondy, France, and Paris 13
University School of Medicine, Bobigny, France.
Uniform
application of a difficult
airway algorithm might
de-crease the incidence
of
hypoxic
brain
damage during anesthesia induction
In
a
large
prospective
study,
application of a simple
airway
algorithm,
including use of new
visual
intubation
devices, achieved high
adherence rate and
successful
tracheal
intuba-tion in all patients
with difficult airways
Results:
Overall,
12,225
Anesthesiology, V 114 No 1
25
January 2011
expert
opinion,
consensus
conferences,
Conclusi
and proons:
spectively
Tracheal
validated
intubatio algorithms.3,4
n can be
These
achieved
strategies
successallow successful
fully in a
intubation of
large
cohort of most patients
with difficult
patients
airways. The
with
a
endotracheal
new
tube is
managem
introduced
ent
without
algorithm
requiring
incorpora direct vision,
ting the using either
use
of gum elastic
bougie (GEB)
gum
or intubating
elastic
laryngeal
bougie,
mask airway.
Air-traq,
However,
and LMA new devices
CTrach that provide a
devices.
viewing
system, such
as the Airtraq
laryngoscope
TRICT
(AQ-L;
VYGON,
adherence
Ecouen,
to defined
strategies France) and
the LMA
and
CTrach
algorithms
can resolve (LMA-CT;
SEBAC,
most
Pantin,
problems
in airway France), have
manageme recently been
developed
nt.1,2 The
French and validated
National for difficult
tracheal
Society of
57
Anesthesio intubation.
logy The current
recently algorithms for
difficult
pro-posed
airway
strategies
for management
do not
managing
cannot incorpo-rate
these new
intubate,
devices or
cannot
ven-tilate consider their
events appropriate
based on role. Because
American these devices
often can
Society of
Anesthesio allow tracheal
intubation
logy
guidelines, under direct
vision when
conventional
airway
management
fails, we
included these
new devices
in an updated
difficult
airway
management
algorithm.
We
prospectivel
y assessed
an algorithm
for difficult
airway
managemen
t
that
included
video
assistance
using these
two
new
airway
devices. We
intended
that the trachea of all
patients
with
difficult
airways
would
be
intu-bated
using visual
guidance.
Materials
and
Methods
Study
Design
This
prospective
validation
study was
conducted at
the
Jean
Verdier
University
Hospital of
Paris
(Bondy,
France)
from
January
2008
to
December
2009. The
Anesthe An
sia
anesthesiolog
Settings ist supervised
and
one of the
Particip ORs and the
ants
postanesthesi
Jean
a care unit.
Verdier
The
two
Hospital is remaining
a tertiary, anes350-bed thesiologists
surgical managed two
teaching ORs each. A
hospital specialized
that
anestheincludes a
central
surgical
unit made
of
five
operating
rooms
(ORs)
encircling
a 10-bed
postanesth
esia care
unit and
two
externalize
d
ORs
dedicated
to
emergent
and
obstetric
cases.
Fifteen
senior
anesthesiol
ogists with
tist
nurse
cared for the
patients in
each
OR.
Four-hands
induction of
anesthesia
was
systematical
ly
performed.
The
anesthetic
nurse
usually
initiated
standard
airway
management.
In
case
of
failure of the
first tracheal
intubation
at-tempt
with
the
Macintosh
laryngoscop
e
(MacintoshL) as-sisted
with GEB,
the
anesthesiolo
gist
was
requested to
manage the
airway.
Over a 6month
period,
all
participants
were
instructed in
the use of the
AQ-L
and
LMA-CT
devices and
then
given
practical
training
using
a
standard
intubation
mannequin
and
a
difficult
airway
management
simulator.
intubation
After
training, were enrolled
in the study.
the
physicians We included
had
apatients
period ofreceiving
clinical therapy
for
experienc gastric re-flux
e whereor
patients
the
who
were
devices known
to
(AQ-L
have a hiatus
and LMA-hernia
but
CT) werewere
used
ascurrently
primary asymptomatic
airway
.
Pregnant
devices inwomen,
morbidly emergency
obese
cases,
and
patients patients
at
admitted risk
for
for
aspiration
elective were
bari-atric excluded.
surgery.
We
Preoperati
considere ve Workd
thatup
clinical Anesthesia
proficienc care,
y
wasincluding
acquired monitoring,
after eachcomplied with
airway
French
device, Society
of
and
theAnesthesiolog
videoy
and
viewing Intensive
sys-tem Care
had beenMedicine
clinical
used
successful practice
ly
10guidelines.
Special
times.
attention was
After
to
training, given
preoperative
the study
airway
period
started. assessment.
The
Patients participating
anesthesiologi
All
patients sts routinely
admitted assessed the
patients
for elective
before
surgery
anesthesia
given
using defined
general
measures of
anes-thesia
airway
requiring
difficulty
tracheal
(table 1).8 11
Patients
in
whom airway
man-agement
was expected
to be difficult
were
systematically
identi-fied
and listed on
a
Difficult
Airway Board
set up in the
anes-thesia
department
and discussed
at a weekly
meeting. For
patients with
three or more
features of a
difficult
airway,
the
anesthesiologi
st
decided
before
anesthesia
started
whether
to
use
succinylcholi
ne to aid
intubation,
and how to
proceed with
subsequent
intubation.
Patient
Exclusion
s
Patients
with
a
mouth
opening (or
interincisor
distance) of
less than 25
mm,
with
severe fixed
flexion
deformity of
the cervical
spine, or a
history
of
previous
impossible
tracheal
intubation,
were
intubated
while awake
by use of
fiberscop general
e-guided anesthesia
nasotrach with mus-cle
eal
relaxant.
intubation
. All otherAirway
patients Managem
under- ent
went
A standard
tracheal method for
intubation preoxygenati
given
on was used,
Anest
hesio
logy
2011;
114:2
533
26
Amat
hieu
et al.
aiming
to
achieve an
end-tidal
oxygen
concentration
more
than
90%. Patient
position was
adjusted
according to
body mass
index
PERIOPERATIVE MEDICINE
Table 1. Risk Factors for Airway Management Difficulty Systematically Assessed at the Preoperative Visit
Feature
Details
Men 50 yr
Obesity with BMI 30 kg/m 2
Sleep apnea syndrome
(BMI). If BMI was more than 35 kg/m , the head and neck
position was raised for preoxygenation and tracheal intubation. In patients with fewer than three adverse predictors, the
anesthesia provider assessed the ease of facemask ventilation
before giving muscle relaxant (atracurium or vecuronium).
The ease or difficulty of facemask ventilation was graded,
using a simple score, as follows:
provider
using
pressure-controlled
mechanical
ventilation requiring more than 25 cm H2O; and
Algorithm Description
GEB and AQ-L were available in each OR. In the central
postanesthesia care unit, 10 meters from each OR, additional
equipment was permanently available, consisting of two sets
of three LMA-CT chassis (sizes: 3, 4, and 5), two LMA-CT
viewers placed in their charger, and the WIFI viewer for AQL. We considered gum elastic bougie (Boussignac Bou-gie;
VYGON) as an adjunct to facilitate tracheal access when
Macintosh-L and AQ-L were used. Once the muscle relaxant
had been given, the anesthesia providers followed a set algorithm (fig. 1).
If tracheal intubation was not possible using a Macin-tosh-L
fitted with a size 3 blade, then the AQ-L device was used,
followed, if necessary, by the LMA-CT device. Impos-sible direct
tracheal access was considered to be current if tracheal access was
not possible after two attempts, using
If mask ventilation was impossible, despite changes in grade III and IV ventilation
head position or mask size, the LMA-CT device was used difficulty
or
failed
immediately. If LMA-CT ventilation failed, indicated by no conventional Macintosh-L
end-tidal carbon dioxide curve and chest wall movementtra-cheal intubation despite
within 30 s after laryngeal mask placement, percutaneous GEB use.
transtracheal jet rescue oxygenation (ManuJet; VBM, Al-leins,
France) was to be used.
Study Data Collection
Anesthesiology 2011; 114:2533
Amathieu et al.
27
Fig. 1. Decision tree for muscle relaxant choice and airway management. The difficult ventilation grading scale is the following:
Grade I, ventilation without the need for an oral airway; grade II, ventilation requiring an oral airway; grade III, difficult and
unstable ventilation requiring an oral airway and two providers, or an oral airway and one provider, using mechanical ventilation
(pressure-controlled mode); and grade IV, impossible ventilation. GEB gum elastic bougie.
underwent
awake
fiberscope-guided
istics of all patients with difficult airways were recorded
nasotracheal intuba-tion. Of
from the anesthesia record.
these four patients, one had
a history of previous
Outcome Variables
The main outcome variables were the success rate for difficult intubation (35 kg/m
tracheal intubation using visual guidance and adherence toBMI, 22 mm interincisor
the man-agement algorithm. Other endpoints were the dis-tance, and Mallampati
incidence of complications (hypoxemia, noted as theclass IV), one had a large
lowest SpO2 during airway management, pulmonarythyroid tumor distorting the
upper airway and severely
aspiration, and evidence of airway trauma).
narrowing the trachea, and
two had a fixed flexion
Statistical Analyses
Descriptive statistics, including frequency counts,deformity of the cervical
proportion, mean, and SD calculation, were computed spine and a limited mouth
aperture (20 mm) preusing XLSTAT 2008 (Addinsoft, Paris, France).
venting airway insertion and
manipulation.
Results
Airway Management
In the 2-yr study period, 12,225 patients were admitted for Outcomes
planned elective surgery given general anesthesia. Their mean The pattern of management of
(SD) age was 51 (14) yr and gender ratio (M/F) was 66/44. Athe patients is shown in figure
difficult airway was encountered in 125 patients (1%). 2. Outcome of airway
Physical characteristics and risk factors for airwaymanagement
of
all
management of all participants (n 12,225) and details of anesthetized par-ticipants (n
patients with airway management difficulties (n 125) are listed 12,221) and of patients with
in table 2. General anesthesia and paralysis were in-duced in airway
manage-ment
12,221 of these patients. The four other patients
difficulties (n 125) are listed
in table 3. Grade III or IV
28
PERIOPERATIVE MEDICINE
Table 2. Physical Characteristics and Risk Factors for Airway management of All Participants (n 12,225) and
Details of Patients with Airway Management Difficulties (n 125)
Patients, n (%)
or Mean SD
All participants (n 12,225)
Planned awake fiberscope-guided nasotracheal intubation
Surgery
Abdominal
Gynecological
Thyroid
Obese patients with BMI 30 kg/m (n 789)
Abdominal surgery
Gynecological surgery
Thyroid surgery
Morbidly obese patients with BMI 50 kg/m (n 104)
Abdominal surgery
Gynecological surgery
Thyroid surgery
Patients showing 3 difficult airway management factors at the preoperative
anesthesia visit (n 188)
Abdominal surgery
Gynecologic surgery
Thyroid surgery
Patients with airway management difficulties* (n 125)
Gender (M/F) ratio
Mean age, yr
Mean body mass index, kg/m
Mean interincisor distance, mm
Mean thyromental distance, mm
Retrognathia
Severely limited jaw protrusion
Obstructive sleep apnea
Mallampati class (n per class)
Mean cervical neck circumference, cm
Cricothyroid membrane access difficulty score (n per score)
46,969 (57)
4,768 (39)
488 (4)
579 (74)
151 (19)
59(7)
88(85)
15(14)
1(1)
147 (78)
35(18)
6(4)
66/34
50 13
43 14
33 4
64 5
16(13)
10(8)
82(66)
I/5 - II/32 - III/75 - IV/12
44 5
0/32 - 1/82 - 2/10 - 3/2
* A patient with airway management difficulties was arbitrarily defined as facemask ventilation difficulty grade IIIIV or failed Macintoshlaryngoscope tracheal intubation, despite gum elastic bougie use. Difficult ventilation grading scale: Grade I, ventilation without the
need for an oral airway; grade II, ventilation requiring an oral airway; grade III, difficult and unstable ventilation requiring an oral airway
and two providers, or an oral airway and one provider, using mechanical ventilation (pressure-controlled mode); and grade IV,
impossible. Difficulty of cricothyroid membrane access was evaluated by anterior neck palpation using a 4-point score (0 easy, 1
moderately difficult, 2 difficult, 3 very difficult).
BMI body mass index.
29
of
hypoxemia
Amathieu et al.
Fig. 2. Outcome of the management of patients, using the new algorithm. GEB gum elastic bougie; OTI orotracheal intubation.
In this prospective study of 12,221 patients given general proficiency with AQ-L and
anesthesia for elective surgery, we have shown that anall participants were already
algo-rithm incorporating the GEB and two visual systems familiar with the intubating
for tracheal intubation (AQ-L and LMA-CT) allowed laryngeal mask airway, we
tracheal intubation under visual guidance in all patients in esti-mated that proficiency
was acquired after 10
whom airway management was difficult.
successful uses of both
devices. On the basis of our
Limitations of the Study
study, we cannot recomOur study has three limitations. The first is that the patient
mend the current algorithm
population is limited to abdominal, gynecologic, and thyroid
for anesthesia providers who
surgery. Although many of the patients were morbidly obese, we
are not experienced with
did not include other patients with potential problems, such as
both new airway devices.
patients with tumors in the upper airway, patients with cervical
The third weakness is the
trauma and immobilization, or obstetric pa-tients. Application of
size of our institution: an
our algorithm to such patients may not be justifiable. However,
environment lim-ited to five
physicians in our obstetrics unit have also received instruction in operating rooms and a staff
the use of new optical airway devices, and we now incorporate of 15 anesthesiolo-gists. In a
use of AQ-L as the second step after failed Macintosh-L tracheal larger hospital, provision of
intubation in our algo-rithm for difficult tracheal intubation these airway manage-ment
during anesthesia for emergency cesarean section. 12 The seconddevices at all anesthetizing
limitation is that successful use of the algorithm was based on locations and training a
thorough train-ing and practical experience with these newlarger staff of physicians
devices. The physicians involved in this study completed training could be a significant
with
financial and organizational
task.
Co
nce
ptio
n of
the
Diff
icul
t
Air
wa
y
Ma
nag
em
ent
Alg
orit
hm
We included AQ-L and LMACT devices in a previous algorithm
for
managing
unanticipated
difficult
airways, in the operating
room1
or
the
prehospital
tracheal access in case of Cormack and Lehane III and IV and simplicity, device efficacy,
when the arytenoids were visible with laryngoscopes (direct or appropriate staff training, and
indirect), respectively. Adherence to the algorithm was very good the fact that most participants
(there were only two devia-tions), no doubt because of its already had taken part in
Anesthesiology 2011; 114:2533
Amathieu et al.
30
PERIOPERATIVE MEDICINE
Table 3. Outcome of Airway Management of All Anesthetized Participants (n 12,221) and of Patients with Airway
Management Difficulties (n 125)
Patients, n (%)
or Mean SD
Anesthetized patients (n 12,221)
Primary indication for succinylcholine ( 3 risk factors)
Difficult ventilation, grade IV*
Difficult ventilation, grade III*
Secondary indication for succinylcholine (difficult ventilation, grade III* before
muscle relaxant administration)
Nondepolarizing neuromuscular blockade (72% atracurium; 28% vecuronium)
Cormack and Lehane grade III
Cormack and Lehane grade IV
Failure using Macintosh laryngoscope
Failure using Macintosh laryngoscope GEB
Hypoxemia episodes, SpO2 90%
Hypoxemia episodes, SpO2 80%
GEB use with Macintosh laryngoscope (n 236)
GEB success
Airtraq laryngoscope use (n 29)
Successful Airtraq laryngoscope plus GEB for viewed tracheal intubation
LMA CTrach success for ventilation
LMA CTrach success for tracheal intubation under visual control
Patients with airway management difficulties (n 125)
Cormack and Lehane grade for direct laryngoscopy (n per grade)
Facemask ventilation difficulty (n per grade)
Combined Grade III ventilation difficulty and impossible Macintosh
laryngoscope GEB-assisted tracheal intubation
Minimum SpO2 during airway management, %
188 (1.5)
2102 (0.8)
90(0.7)
11,852 (97)
167 (1.3)
3(0.025)
236 (2.0)
29(0.2)
87(0.7)
17(0.1)
207 (84)
27(97)
2(100)
3(100)
I/5 - II/27 - III/91 - IV/2
I/21 - II/37 - III/64 - IV/2
7(5)
91 7
* Difficult ventilation grading scale: Grade I, ventilation without the need for an oral airway; grade II, ventilation requiring an oral airway;
grade III, difficult and unstable ventilation requiring an oral airway and two providers, or an oral airway and one provider, using
mechanical ventilation (pressure-controlled mode); and grade IV,impossible ventilation. A patient with airway management difficulties
was arbitrarily defined as facemask ventilation difficulty Grade IIIIV or failed Macintosh-laryngoscope trachal intubation despite gum
elastic bougie (GEB) use.
BMI body mass index; SpO2 pulse oxygen saturation.
31 Amathieu et al.
trial
hypoxemia
are related to
difficult
Macintosh-L
Table 4.
Feature
intubation,
s of the
we believe
17
that previous
Patients
movement to
that
the second
Experie
step of the
nced
cannotGEB gum
Spo2
elastic
bougie;
intubate
less
SpO2 pulse
branch of the
than
oxygen
80%
cur-rent
saturation.
during
algorithm is
Airway
advisable.
Manage patients with
Reducing the
ment
risk factors
duration of
for a difficult
at-tempts
airway. Most
with
the
of
these
Macintosh-L
Gender (M/F)
ratio with
patients
could have
Mean age,several
yr
risk
prevented
Mean bodyfactors
mass index,
kg/m
(at
some
Mallampati class (n per class)
least three)
episodes
Patients with 3 predictors of
difficult of
have
airwaywould
management
hypoxemia.
beenLehane grade for direct
Cormack and
In
our
excluded(n per grade)
laryngoscopy
obstetric
our
Facemaskfrom
ventilation
difficulty
(n we
perhave
unit,
previous
grade)
now set a
Moment ofalgorithm
occurrence of Sp
time
limit of
During facemask
ventilation
attempts
and would
2
min
for
During failed
have Macintosh
been
Macintosh-L
laryngoscope
managed GEB
attempts at
intubation attempts
using
a
tracheal
During failed Airtraq
fiberscope.
intubation
laryngoscope GEB
Only a few
intubation attempts
before using
episodes of
AQ-L.
*
Thehypoxemia
Difficulty
Cormack
(Sp
O2 80%)
with
mask
and Lehane
grade wasepisodes
ventilation
not
were
(grades III
evaluated inattributed to
and
IV)
one patient
(0.8%) had
who
wasdiffi-culty
given LMA with
an incidence
CTrach
ventilation
similar
to
(SEBAC, (table
4).
that reported
Pantin,
of
France) forMost
in a recent
these were in
rescue
11
review.
ventilation. mor-bidly
Difficult
Grade
III
obese
ventilation
difficulty
in
patients
grading
obese
scale:
during failed
patients
Grade
I,Macintosh-L
ventilation
occurred in
tracheal inwithout the
6%
of
need for antubation
patients who
oral airway;attempts, as
grade
II,found in our
had at least
ventilation
three or more
previous
requiring an
risk factors.
oral airway;algorithm.1
This
grade
III,
Because
difficult and
contrasts
most
unstable
with a rate of
ventila-tion episodes of
0.3%
grade III
ventilation the
dif-ficulty
association
encounter
between
ed
in
difficult
patients
ventilation
with fewer
and difficult
than three
intubation.
fea-tures.
A majority
Clearly,
of
our set of our cases
predictors with difficult
airways were
for
difficult mor-bidly
obese
men
airway
more than 50
management yr of age.
aids
Sleep apnea
detection syn-drome,
of patientslarge
neck,
with
and
high
difficult Mallampati
airways. grades III and
Seven ofIV were the
our
29
most frequent
GEBfeatures
assisted
associated
Macintosh
with
both
-L
difficult
intubation
fail-ures ventilation
had gradeand tracheal
III maskintubation
the
ventilation with
difficulty, Macintosh-L.
strengthen We
ing
encountered
only
one
primary
instance
of
cannot-ventilate in a 68yr-old
morbidly
obese patient
with
many
adverse
factors
and
with a bushy
beard
hampering
cricothyroid
membrane
palpation.
This patients
arterial
oxygenation
was restored
promptly with
LMA-CT.
During
the
study period,
we
used
LMA-CT
(two with size
4 and one
with size 5) in
three patients
to effectively
restore
or
establish an
open airway.
This efficacy
has already
been
recorded.21,22
If LMA-CT
failed
to
improve
oxygenation
in this cannotventilate
scenario we
encountered,
further
management
would have
been
extremely
difficult
because
identification
of the trachea
surface
landmarks
was
impossible. In
this particular
case,
an
attempt
at
direct
laryngoscopy
could
have
been
lifesaving.
Although not
recommended
by the French
Society
of
Anesthesia,
de-viation
from
the
algorithm
might
have
been
appropriate
here.
After
our
experience
with
this
patient,
all
morbidly undertaken in
obese
our hospital,
patients although we
with
adid include
beard arepatients with
asked
toa history of
remove ittreated
before
pharyngeal or
surgery. laryngeal
Those whotumor.
The
have threefour
or
moreexceptions
risk factorshad
awake
and refusefiberscopeto
shaveguided
are
nasotracheal
managed intu-bation
with
performed by
awake
two
nasotrache specialized
al
senior
intubation. anesthesiolog
This policyists. Before
is
now
the advent of
systematic
the
new
ally
airway
applied in
devices with
case
the
a
viewing
surgery
system,
we
may
carried out 10
require
15
deep
fiberscopeneuromusc
guided
ular
intubations
blockade.
per
year,
Over
mostly
in
the 2 yr of
super obese
the study,
patients. This
only four
technical adpatients
vance
has
had to be
clearly
excluded
changed our
from this
practice
in
manageme
airway
nt
management
algorithm.
in morbidly
An
obese patients
important
and reduced
reason is
the
that head
indications
and neck
for
cancer
fiberscopesurgery is
guided
not
32
Anest Amat
hesio hieu
logy et al.
2011;
114:2
533
intubation.
Conclusi
on
In
conclusion,
we used an
algorithm for
airway
management
that
incorporates
GEB, LMACT, and AQL devices in
a
large
cohort
of
anesthetized,
paralyzed
patients.
Successful
tracheal
intubation
under visual
control was
achieved in
all patients
with difficult
airways.
The authors
acknowledg
e
Gordon
Blair
Drummond,
M.D., Ph.D.
(Senior
Lecturer
from
the
Department
of
Anaesthesia
,
Critical
Care
and
Pain
Medicine,
Royal
Infirmary,
Edinburgh,
Scotland),
for his very
helpful
contribution
to
the
editing
process
of
the
manuscript.
PERIOPERATIVE
MEDICINE
References
1. Combes X, Le
Roux B, Suen
P,
Dumerat
M, Motamed
C, Sauvat S,
Duvaldestin
P, Dhonneur
G:
Unanticipate
d
difficult
airway
in
anesthetized
patients:
Prospective
validation of
a
management
algorithm.
ANESTHESIOLO
GY
2004;
100:1146 50
2. Crosby
ET,
Cooper RM,
Douglas MJ,
Doyle
DJ,
Hung
OR,
Labrecque P,
Muir
H,
Murphy MF,
Preston
RP,
Rose DK, Roy
L:
The
unanticipated
difficult
airway with
recommendat
ions
for
management.
Can J Anesth
1998;
45:75776
3. Practice
guidelines for
management
of the difficult
airway.
A
report by the
American
Society
of
Anesthesiolog
ists
Task
Force
on
Management
of
the
Difficult
Airway.
ANESTHESIOLO
GY
1993;
78:597 602
4. Cros
AM:
[Update
on
the
consensus
conference
on
difficult
airway
management:
what
about
the future?]
Ann
Fr
Anesth
Reanim 2008;
27:12
5. Malin
E,
Montblanc J,
Ynineb
Y,
Marret
E,
Bonnet
F:
Performance
of the Airtraq
laryngoscope
after
failed
conventional
tracheal intubation:
A
case series.
Acta
Anaesthesiol
Scand 2009;
53:85863
6. Maharaj
CH,
Costello
JF,
McDonnell
JG, Harte BH,
Laffey
JG:
The
Airtraq
as a rescue
airway device
following
failed direct
laryngoscopy
:
A
case
series.
Anaesthesia
2007; 62:598
601
7. Liu
EH,
Wender
R,
Goldman AJ:
The
LMA
CTrach
in
patients with
difficult
airways.
ANESTHESIOLO
GY
2009;
110:9413
8. Langeron
O,
Masso
E,
Huraux
C,
Guggiari M,
Bianchi
A,
Coriat P, Riou
B: Prediction
of
difficult
mask
ventilation.
ANESTHESIOLO
GY
2000;
92:1229 36
9. Kheterpal
S,
Han
R,
Tremper KK,
Shanks
A,
Tait
AR,
OReilly
M,
Ludwig
TA:
Incidence
and
predictors of
difficult and
impossible
mask
ventilation.
ANESTHESIOLO
GY
2006;
105:88591
10.
ElOrbany
M,
Woehlck HJ:
Difficult
mask
ventilation.
Anesth Analg
2009;
109:1870
80
11.Kheterpal
S,
Martin
L,
Shanks AM,
Tremper KK:
Prediction
and outcomes
of impossible
mask
ventilation: A
review
of
50,000
anesthetics.
ANESTHESIOLO
GY
2009;
110:8917
12.
Dhonne
ur G, Ndoko
S, Amathieu
R, Housseini
LE, Poncelet
C, Tual L:
Tracheal
intubation
using
the
Airtraq
in
morbid obese
patients
undergoing
emergency
cesarean
delivery.
ANESTHESIOLO
GY
2007;
106:629 30
13.
Maharaj
CH, Costello
JF,
Higgins
BD,
Harte
BH,
Laffey
JG: Learning
and
performance
of
tracheal
intubation by
novice
personnel: A
comparison
of the Airtraq
and
Macintosh
laryngoscope.
Anaesthesia
2006;
61:6717
14.
Combes
X, Jabre P,
Jbeili
C,
Leroux
B,
Bastuji-Garin
S, Mar-genet
A, Adnet F,
Dhonneur G:
Prehospital
standardizati
on of medical
airway
management:
Incidence and
risk factors of
difficult
airway. Acad
Emerg
Med
2006; 13:828
34
15.
Dhonne
ur G, Abdi W,
Ndoko
SK,
Amathieu R,
Risk N, El
Housseini L,
Polliand
C,
Champault G,
Combes
X,
Tual L: Videoassisted
versus
conventional
tracheal
intubation in
morbidly
obese
patients.
Obes
Surg
2009;
19:1096 101
16.
Dhonne
ur G, Ndoko
SK, Amathieu
R, Attias A,
Housseini LE,
Polliand
C,
Tual
L:
A
comparison
of
two
techniques
for inserting
the
Airtraq
laryngoscope
in
morbidly
obese
patients.
Anaesthesia
2007; 62:774
7
17.
Dhonne
ur G, Ndoko
SK, Yavchitz
A, Foucrier A,
Fessen-meyer
C, Pollian C,
Combes
X,
Tual
L:
Tracheal
intubation of
morbidly
obese
patients: LMA
CTrach
vs
direct
laryngoscopy.
Br
J
Anaesth
2006; 97:742
5
18.
Ndoko
SK, Amathieu
R, Tual L,
Polliand
C,
Kamoun W, El
Housseini L,
Champault G,
Dhonneur G:
Tracheal
intubation of
morbidly
obese
patients:
A
randomized
trial
comparing
performance
of Macintosh
and
Airtraq
laryngoscope
s.
Br
J
Anaesth
2008;
100:263 8
19.
Dhonneu
r G, Ndoko
SK: Tracheal
intubation
with the LMA
CTrach
or
direct
laryngoscopy
(letter).
Anesth Analg
2007;
104:227
20.
Goldman
AJ:
Comparing
the
Airtraq
with the LMA
CTrach.
ANESTHESIOLO
GY
2007;
107:675 6
21.
Liu EH,
Goy RW, Lim
Y, Chen FG:
Success
of
tracheal
intubation
with
intubating
laryngeal
mask
airways:
A
randomized
trial of the
LMA Fastrach
and
LMA
CTrach.
ANESTHESIOLO
GY
2008;
108:621 6
22.
Goldma
n
AJ,
Rosenblatt
WH:
The
LMA CTrach
in
airway
resuscitation:
Six
case
reports.
Anaesthesia
2006;
61:9757
23.
Johns
MW: A new
method
for
measuring
daytime
sleepiness:
The Epworth
sleepiness
scale. Sleep
1991; 14:540
56
24.
Flemons
WW,
Whitelaw WA,
Brant
R,
Remmers JE:
Likeli-hood
ratios for a
sleep apnea
clinical
prediction
rule. Am J
respir
Crit
Care
Med
1994;
150:1279
85
25.
Calder I,
Calder
J,
Crockard HA:
Difficult
direct
laryngoscopy
in
patients
with cervical
spine disease.
Anaesthesia
1995; 51:284
5
26.
Brodsky
JB, Lemmens
HJ,
BrockUtne
JG,
Vierra
M,
Saidman LJ:
Morbid
obesity
and
tracheal
intubation.
Anesth Analg
2002;
94:732 6
Anesthesiology
2011;
114:25
33
33
Amathi
eu et
al.