-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Glottic visibility for laryngeal surgery: Tritube vs. microlaryngeal tube: A randomised controlled trial.
- Johannes Schmidt, Franziska Günther, Jonas Weber, Vadim Kehm, Jens Pfeiffer, Christoph Becker, Christin Wenzel, Silke Borgmann, Steffen Wirth, and Stefan Schumann.
- From the Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care (JS, FG, JW, VK, CW, SB, SW, SS) and Department of Otorhinolaryngology (JP, CB), Medical Centre - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
- Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2019 Dec 1; 36 (12): 963-971.
BackgroundGood visibility is essential for successful laryngeal surgery. A Tritube with outer diameter 4.4 mm, combined with flow-controlled ventilation (FCV), enables ventilation by active expiration with a sealed trachea and may improve laryngeal visibility.ObjectivesWe hypothesised that a Tritube with FCV would provide better laryngeal visibility and surgical conditions for laryngeal surgery than a conventional microlaryngeal tube (MLT) with volume-controlled ventilation (VCV).DesignRandomised, controlled trial.SettingUniversity Medical Centre.PatientsA total of 55 consecutive patients (>18 years) undergoing elective laryngeal surgery were assessed for participation, providing 40 evaluable data sets with 20 per group.InterventionsRandom allocation to intubation with Tritube and ventilation with FCV (Tritube-FCV group) or intubation with MLT 6.0 and ventilation with VCV (MLT-VCV) as control. Tidal volumes of 7 ml kg predicted body weight, and positive end-expiratory pressure of 7 cmH2O were standardised between groups.Main Outcome MeasuresPrimary endpoint was the tube-related concealment of laryngeal structures, measured on videolaryngoscopic photographs by appropriate software. Secondary endpoints were surgical conditions (categorical four-point rating scale), respiratory variables and change of end-expiratory lung volume from atmospheric airway pressure to ventilation with positive end-expiratory pressure. Data are presented as median [IQR].ResultsThere was less concealment of laryngeal structures with the Tritube than with the MLT; 7 [6 to 9] vs. 22 [18 to 27] %, (P < 0.001). Surgical conditions were rated comparably (P = 0.06). A subgroup of residents in training perceived surgical conditions to be better with the Tritube compared with the MLT (P = 0.006). Respiratory system compliance with the Tritube was higher at 61 [52 to 71] vs. 46 [41 to 51] ml cmH2O (P < 0.001), plateau pressure was lower at 14 [13 to 15] vs. 17 [16 to 18] cmH2O (P < 0.001), and change of end-expiratory lung volume was higher at 681 [463 to 849] vs. 414 [194 to 604] ml, (P = 0.023) for Tritube-FCV compared with MLT-VCV.ConclusionDuring laryngeal surgery a Tritube improves visibility of the surgical site but not surgical conditions when compared with a MLT 6.0. FCV improves lung aeration and respiratory system compliance compared with VCV.Trial Registry NumberDRKS00013097.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.