Anton W R, Gordon R W, Jordan T M, Posner K L, Cheney F W
Respiratory Care Services, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle 98195.
Ann Emerg Med. 1991 Mar;20(3):271-5. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(05)80938-2.
We compared the performance of the Fenem FEF end-tidal CO2 detector with the TRIMED capnometer to verify endotracheal intubation.
The FEF indicates the presence of CO2 by the color change of a chemically treated indicator; the TRIMED uses infrared technology. Both devices were used during 60 intubations.
Intubations during in-hospital emergency situations outside of the operating room were studied.
Adult patients undergoing intubation for respiratory failure, CPR, and other airway protection situations were enrolled in the study.
The TRIMED monitor and FEF detector were placed in series between the manual resuscitator and the patient's endotracheal tube adapter after endotracheal tube placement.
We defined the acceptable criterion for detection of CO2 as production of a positive signal within six manual resuscitator bag breaths. The TRIMED met this criterion in 58 of 60 patients (sensitivity, 0.97) and the FEF met this criterion in 59 of 60 patients (sensitivity, 0.98). A paired t test showed no statistically significant difference in performance between the two devices. In five of nine cases of intubation during CPR, the color change of the FEF was described as "subtle." In one CPR case, a positive signal was not obtained by either device.
We conclude that the performance of the FEF CO2 detector is equal to that of the TRIMED monitor for verification of endotracheal intubation in nonCPR situations. Interpretation of FEF color changes during CPR should be approached with caution until further studies using the FEF during CPR are completed.
我们比较了Fenem呼气末二氧化碳(FEF)探测器与TRIMED二氧化碳监测仪在验证气管插管方面的性能。
FEF通过化学处理指示剂的颜色变化来指示二氧化碳的存在;TRIMED使用红外技术。在60次插管过程中使用了这两种设备。
研究了在医院手术室以外的院内紧急情况下的插管情况。
纳入了因呼吸衰竭、心肺复苏(CPR)及其他气道保护情况而接受插管的成年患者。
在气管插管放置后,将TRIMED监测仪和FEF探测器串联置于手动复苏器与患者气管导管适配器之间。
我们将检测到二氧化碳的可接受标准定义为在手动复苏器进行六次呼吸操作内产生阳性信号。TRIMED在60例患者中的58例达到了该标准(敏感性为0.97),FEF在60例患者中的59例达到了该标准(敏感性为0.98)。配对t检验显示两种设备在性能上无统计学显著差异。在CPR期间的9例插管中有5例,FEF的颜色变化被描述为“不明显”。在1例CPR病例中,两种设备均未获得阳性信号。
我们得出结论,在非CPR情况下,FEF二氧化碳探测器在验证气管插管方面的性能与TRIMED监测仪相当。在完成更多关于CPR期间使用FEF的研究之前,对CPR期间FEF颜色变化的解读应谨慎。