Suppr超能文献

在紧急气管插管期间,仅靠二氧化碳描记法来确认气管内导管位置是不完善的。

Capnography alone is imperfect for endotracheal tube placement confirmation during emergency intubation.

作者信息

Li J

机构信息

Mount Auburn Hospital, Division of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02238, USA.

出版信息

J Emerg Med. 2001 Apr;20(3):223-9. doi: 10.1016/s0736-4679(00)00318-8.

Abstract

This analysis primarily sought to determine the effectiveness of end-tidal capnography for tube placement confirmation during emergency airway management. Secondary objectives were validation of the rate of unanticipated esophageal placement during emergency intubation and quantification of the portion of intubations performed in patients with cardiac arrest where capnography is not recommended. The study was performed in two phases. For the primary objective, a meta-analysis was performed on all experimental capnography trials enrolling emergency populations. For the secondary objectives, inadvertent esophageal intubation and cardiac arrest rates were calculated from a large prospective multicenter observational study of emergency intubation cases. Data analysis included calculation of descriptive statistics, sensitivity, specificity, and confidence intervals (CI). Based on 2,192 intubations, a meta-analysis of previous capnography trials resulted in an aggregate sensitivity of 93% (95% CI 92-94%) and an aggregate specificity of 97% (CI 93-99%) for emergency tube placement confirmation. Thus, for emergency capnography use, the false-negative failure rate (tube in trachea but capnography reports esophagus) was 7% and the false-positive rate (tube in esophagus but capnography reports trachea) was 3%. This translates to potential harm for one patient in every 10 treated with capnographic confirmation alone (number needed to harm: 14 for false-negative, 33 for false-positive, and 10 for both). A further literature review demonstrated no sole method of tube placement confirmation is completely foolproof. Of 4,602 consecutive intubations reported to the National Emergency Airway Registry, 4% of emergency intubation attempts resulted in accidental esophageal intubation, and 10% occurred in nontraumatic cardiac arrest patients. During tracheal intubation of critically ill patients, it is concluded that the rate of accidental esophageal tube placement warrants continued improvement in emergency airway techniques. Misidentification of esophageal placement in the emergency setting may occur with capnography. Multiple methods of tube placement confirmation are superior to any single method because no single method has perfect accuracy.

摘要

本分析主要旨在确定呼气末二氧化碳监测在紧急气道管理期间用于确认气管导管位置的有效性。次要目标是验证紧急插管期间意外食管插管的发生率,并对不建议使用二氧化碳监测的心脏骤停患者的插管比例进行量化。该研究分两个阶段进行。对于主要目标,对所有纳入急诊人群的二氧化碳监测实验性试验进行了荟萃分析。对于次要目标,从一项关于急诊插管病例的大型前瞻性多中心观察性研究中计算意外食管插管率和心脏骤停率。数据分析包括描述性统计、敏感性、特异性和置信区间(CI)的计算。基于2192次插管,对先前二氧化碳监测试验的荟萃分析得出,用于紧急气管导管位置确认的总体敏感性为93%(95%CI 92-94%),总体特异性为97%(CI 93-99%)。因此,对于紧急情况下使用二氧化碳监测,假阴性失败率(气管内有导管但二氧化碳监测报告为食管)为7%,假阳性率(食管内有导管但二氧化碳监测报告为气管)为3%。这意味着仅通过二氧化碳监测确认进行治疗的每10名患者中就有1名可能受到伤害(伤害所需人数:假阴性为14,假阳性为33,两者均为10)。进一步的文献综述表明,没有一种确认气管导管位置的单一方法是完全万无一失的。向国家紧急气道登记处报告的4602例连续插管中,4%的紧急插管尝试导致意外食管插管,10%发生在非创伤性心脏骤停患者中。在对重症患者进行气管插管时,可以得出结论,意外食管插管率需要紧急气道技术的持续改进。在紧急情况下,二氧化碳监测可能会出现食管位置误判。多种确认气管导管位置的方法优于任何单一方法,因为没有一种单一方法具有完美的准确性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验