Department of Emergency Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Emerg Med J. 2013 Jul;30(7):527-31. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2012-201463.
Following a chemical, biological, radiation and nuclear (CBRN) incident, prompt establishment of an advanced airway is required for patients with respiratory failure within the warm zone, while wearing personal protective equipment (PPE). Previous studies reported that intubation attempts were prolonged, and incidence of esophageal intubation was increased with conventional Macintosh laryngoscope (McL), while wearing CBRN-PPE. Pentax-AWS (AWS), a recently introduced portable video laryngoscope, was compared with the McL to test its utility for tracheal intubation while wearing CBRN-PPE.
31 participants performed unsuited and suited intubations on an advanced life support simulator. The sequence of intubating devices and PPE wearing were randomised. Time to complete tracheal intubation (primary end point), time to see the vocal cords, overall success rate, percentage of glottic opening, dental compression and ease of intubation were measured.
Suited intubations required significantly longer time to complete intubation than unsuited intubations, in both McL and AWS (22.2 vs 26.4 s, 14.2 vs 18.2 s, respectively). However, suited AWS intubations required shorter time to complete tracheal intubation than unsuited McL intubations (18.2 vs 22.2 s). In secondary outcomes, moreover, suited intubations using the AWS compared favourably with unsuited intubations using the McL.
Although the CBRN-PPE adversely affected time required to complete tracheal intubation with the AWS, suited intubations using the AWS were even superior to unsuited intubations using the McL. The AWS should be a promising device to perform tracheal intubation while wearing the CBRN-PPE.
在化学、生物、辐射和核(CBRN)事件后,在温暖地带,穿着个人防护装备(PPE)的呼吸衰竭患者需要迅速建立高级气道。先前的研究报告称,使用传统的 Macintosh 喉镜(McL)时,插管尝试时间延长,食管插管的发生率增加。最近引入的便携式视频喉镜 Pentax-AWS(AWS)与 McL 进行比较,以测试其在穿着 CBRN-PPE 时进行气管插管的实用性。
31 名参与者在高级生命支持模拟器上进行了不适合和适合的插管。插管设备和 PPE 佩戴的顺序是随机的。测量完成气管插管的时间(主要终点)、看到声带的时间、总体成功率、声门开口百分比、牙齿压迫和插管难易程度。
在 McL 和 AWS 中,适合的插管比不适合的插管完成插管所需的时间明显更长(分别为 22.2 秒和 26.4 秒,14.2 秒和 18.2 秒)。然而,适合的 AWS 插管比不适合的 McL 插管完成气管插管所需的时间更短(18.2 秒与 22.2 秒)。此外,在次要结局中,使用 AWS 的适合插管与使用 McL 的不适合插管相比具有优势。
尽管 CBRN-PPE 会对 AWS 完成气管插管所需的时间产生不利影响,但使用 AWS 的适合插管甚至优于使用 McL 的不适合插管。AWS 应该是在穿着 CBRN-PPE 进行气管插管的有前途的设备。