From the *Department of Anesthesiology, Procare Riaya Hospital, Al-Khobar, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; †Department of Anesthesiology, Lebanese University, Beirut, Lebanon; ‡Department of Anesthesiology, Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center; §Department of Anesthesiology, University of Illinois College of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois; ‖Laboratoire d'Anesthésie, INSERM UMR788, Université Paris-Sud; ¶Département d'Anesthésie-Réanimation, Hôpitaux Universitaires Paris-Sud, AP-HP, Le Kremlin Bicêtre, France; and #Department of Anesthesiology, Tanta University Hospital, Egypt.
Anesth Analg. 2014 Mar;118(3):580-6. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000068.
In the last 2 decades, the effectiveness of cricoid pressure (CP) in occluding the esophageal entrance has been questioned. Recent magnetic resonance imaging studies yielded conflicting conclusions. We used real-time visual and mechanical means to assess the patency of the esophageal entrance with and without CP in anesthetized and paralyzed adult patients.
One hundred seven, nonobese ASA physical status I and II patients were recruited for the study. A cricoid force of 30 N was used. This force was standardized by using a weighing scale before application of CP in each patient. After oxygen administration, anesthetic induction, neuromuscular blockade, and establishment of manual ventilation with FIO2 = 1.0, the view of the glottis and esophageal entrance was visualized, and video recordings were obtained by using a Glidescope video laryngoscope. Attempts to insert 2 gastric tubes (GTs), size 12 and 20 F, into the esophagus were made by a "blinded" operator without and with CP, the timing of which was randomized. A successful insertion of a GT in the presence of CP was considered evidence of a patent esophageal entrance (ineffective CP), whereas an unsuccessful insertion of a GT was considered evidence of an occluded esophageal entrance (effective CP). After the attempts to insert the GTs were completed, tracheal intubation was performed while CP was applied. The position of the esophageal entrance in relation to the glottis (midline versus lateral) was assessed from the video recordings, with and without CP.
We stopped the study when 79 patients (41 men and 38 women) qualified for and completed the study (2-sided Clopper-Pearson confidence interval (CI) 95% to 100%, n = 72). Advancement of either size GT into the esophagus could not be accomplished during CP in any patient but was easily done in all subjects when CP was not applied. This occurred whether the esophageal entrance was in a midline position or in a left or right lateral position relative to the glottis. Esophageal patency was visually observed in the absence of CP, whereas occlusion of the esophageal entrance was observed during CP in all patients. Without CP, the esophageal entrance was in a left lateral position in relation to the glottis in 57% ([95 % CI, 45%-68%)] of patients, at midline in 32% (CI, 22%-43%), and in a right lateral position in 11% (CI, 5%-21%). The position did not change with CP.
The current study provides additional visual and mechanical evidence supporting a success rate of at least 95% by using a cricoid force of 30 N to occlude the esophageal entrance in anesthetized and paralyzed normal adult patients. The efficacy of the maneuver was independent of the position of the esophageal entrance relative to the glottis, whether midline or lateral.
在过去的 20 年中,环状软骨压力(CP)在阻塞食管入口方面的有效性受到了质疑。最近的磁共振成像研究得出了相互矛盾的结论。我们使用实时视觉和机械手段在麻醉和瘫痪的成年患者中评估 CP 时和不使用 CP 时食管入口的通畅性。
我们招募了 107 名非肥胖 ASA 身体状况 I 和 II 级患者进行研究。使用 30 N 的环状软骨压力。在每个患者应用 CP 之前,使用称重秤对这种压力进行标准化。在给氧、麻醉诱导、神经肌肉阻滞以及使用 FIO2 = 1.0 建立手动通气后,观察声门和食管入口的视图,并使用 Glidescope 视频喉镜获得视频记录。由一名“盲”操作者在没有 CP 和有 CP 的情况下尝试将 2 根胃管(GT),大小为 12 和 20 F,插入食管,插入的时机是随机的。在 CP 存在的情况下成功插入 GT 被认为是食管入口通畅的证据(CP 无效),而在 CP 存在的情况下未能插入 GT 被认为是食管入口阻塞的证据(CP 有效)。在完成 GT 插入尝试后,在应用 CP 的同时进行气管插管。从视频记录中评估 CP 时和不使用 CP 时食管入口相对于声门的位置(中线与外侧)。
当 79 名患者(41 名男性和 38 名女性)符合并完成研究条件(双侧 Clopper-Pearson 置信区间(CI)95%至 100%,n = 72)时,我们停止了研究。在任何患者中,CP 期间都无法将任何大小的 GT 推进食管,但在没有 CP 时,所有患者都很容易完成。无论食管入口相对于声门位于中线位置还是左侧或右侧外侧位置,均会发生这种情况。在没有 CP 的情况下,食管入口在 57%([95%CI,45%-68%])的患者中位于左侧,在 32%(CI,22%-43%)的患者中位于中线,在 11%(CI,5%-21%)的患者中位于右侧。CP 时位置未发生变化。
当前的研究提供了额外的视觉和机械证据,支持在麻醉和瘫痪的正常成年患者中使用 30 N 的环状软骨压力至少有 95%的成功率来阻塞食管入口。该操作的有效性与食管入口相对于声门的位置无关,无论位于中线还是外侧。