Department of Anesthesiology, Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan, Taiwan.
Department of Health and Nutrition, Chia Nan University of Pharmacy and Science, Tainan, Taiwan.
J Clin Monit Comput. 2021 Oct;35(5):1235-1238. doi: 10.1007/s10877-021-00649-5. Epub 2021 Jan 19.
Because the use of conventional digital palpation technique for the identification of cricothyroid membrane (CTM) has been widely believed to be unreliable, the 'laryngeal handshake' technique (LH) has been introduced for CTM identification in the event of cricothyroidotomy. To provide evidence for clinical practice, this pilot meta-analysis aimed at investigating whether identification of CTM with the LH is superior to that with the palpation technique. Studies that evaluated the accuracy of CTM identification by using LH or palpation techniques (i.e., LH group vs. Palpation group) were identified from electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Medline, google scholar, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to July 5, 2020. The primary outcome was the accuracy of both techniques. Four studies published from 2018 to 2020 were considered relevant and were read in full. We found no significant difference in success rate of CTM identification [Risk Ratio (RR) 1.09, 95% CI 0.89-1.34, p = 0.41] between the two groups. These preliminary results of the current study demonstrated no significant differences in success rate between the laryngeal handshake and conventional palpation techniques in cricothyroid membrane identification.
由于传统的数字触诊技术用于识别环甲膜（CTM）的可靠性受到广泛质疑，因此引入了“喉握手”技术（LH），以便在进行环甲切开术时识别 CTM。为了为临床实践提供证据，本初步荟萃分析旨在调查使用 LH 识别 CTM 是否优于触诊技术。从电子数据库（包括 PubMed、Embase、Medline、google scholar 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库）中确定了评估使用 LH 或触诊技术（即 LH 组与触诊组）识别 CTM 准确性的研究，检索时间为 2020 年 7 月 5 日。主要结局是两种技术的准确性。从 2018 年到 2020 年发表的四项研究被认为是相关的，并进行了全文阅读。我们发现两组之间 CTM 识别成功率无显著差异[风险比（RR）1.09，95%置信区间（CI）0.89-1.34，p=0.41]。本研究的初步结果表明，在识别环甲膜方面，喉握手和传统触诊技术的成功率没有显著差异。
