• Pei-Er Zhuang, Jiang-Hong Lu, Wei-Kai Wang, and Ming-Hua Cheng.
• Department of Anesthesiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, NO. 57 Changping Road, Jinping District, Shantou, Guangdong Province, China.
• J Clin Anesth. 2023 Jun 1; 86: 111079111079.

Study ObjectiveThe main objective was to devise an endotracheal intubation formula based on pediatric patients' strongly correlated growth parameters. The secondary objective was to compare the accuracy of the new formula to the age-based formula from Advanced Pediatric Life Support Course (APLS formula) and the middle finger length-based formula (MFL-based formula).DesignA prospective, observational study.SettingOperation.Patients111 subjects age 4-12 years old undergoing elective surgeries with general orotracheal anesthesia.Interventions And MeasurementsGrowth parameters, including age, gender, height, weight, BMI, middle finger length, nasal-tragus length, and sternum length, were measured before surgeries. Tracheal length and the optimal endotracheal intubation depth (D) were measured and calculated by Disposcope. Regression analysis were used to establish a new formula for predicting the intubation depth. A self-controlled paired design was used to compare the accuracy of the intubation depth between the new formula, APLS formula, and MFL-based formula.Main ResultsHeight (R = 0.897, P < 0.001) was strongly correlated to tracheal length and the endotracheal intubation depth in pediatric patients. New formulae basing on height were established, including new formula 1: D (cm) = 4 + 0.1 × Height (cm) and new formula 2: D (cm) = 3 + 0.1 × Height (cm). Via Bland-Altman analysis, the mean differences for new formula 1, new formula 2, APLS formula and MFL-based formula were - 0.354 cm (95% LOA, -1.289 to 1.998 cm), 1.354 cm (95% LOA, -0.289 to 2.998 cm), 1.154 cm (95% LOA, -1.002 to 3.311 cm), -0.619 cm (95% LOA, -2.960 to 1.723 cm), respectively. The rate of optimal intubation for new formula 1 (84.69%) was higher than for new formula 2 (55.86%), APLS formula (61.26%), and MFL-based formula. (69.37%).ConclusionsThe prediction accuracy for intubation depth of the new formula 1 was higher than the other formulae. The new formula based on height: D (cm) = 4 + 0.1 × Height (cm) was preferable to APLS formula and MFL-based formula with a high incidence of appropriate endotracheal tube position.Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

15 keywords...

hide…