Youssef Daniel Luke, Paddle Paul
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Monash Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Surgery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Laryngoscope. 2022 Jun;132(6):1231-1236. doi: 10.1002/lary.29885. Epub 2021 Sep 29.
Managing the shared airway in subglottic stenosis presents a unique challenge. Tubeless anesthesia with apneic oxygenation is increasingly being adopted as it overcomes the limitations of access to and visualization of the narrowed subglottis. Low-flow oxygenation (LFO) and transnasal humidified rapid-insufflation ventilatory exchange (THRIVE) are two delivery techniques. We sought to compare their utility in this patient cohort.
Retrospective cohort study.
Thirty-five cases of endoscopic debridement of subglottic stenosis were retrospectively studied. Operative technique was consistent among the cases. Oxygen was delivered at low-flow rates at the laryngeal inlet with LFO (n = 23) or high-flow rates at the nares with THRIVE (n = 12). Data regarding apnea time, the need for rescue ventilation, and relevant patient and disease factors were recorded for analysis.
Median apnea time for LFO and THRIVE were 34 and 25 minutes, respectively. Rescue with intermittent supraglottic jet ventilation was required more often with LFO than THRIVE (61% vs 33%) and was sufficient for the case to be completed in all but one instance. Elevated BMI was the sole significant predictor of early oxygen desaturation (24.8 vs 37.95 kg/m , P = .002) with LFO. Median stenosis diameter was 6 mm (range 2-14).
Apneic techniques are safe and feasible for the endoscopic management of subglottic stenosis of all severities. Elevated BMI is the only significant predictor for early oxygen desaturation. In the many healthcare settings where THRIVE is not available, LFO is a valid alterative in the nonobese patient. Laryngoscope, 132:1231-1236, 2022.
管理声门下狭窄患者的共享气道是一项独特的挑战。无管麻醉联合窒息性氧合越来越多地被采用,因为它克服了声门下狭窄部位难以接近和可视化的局限性。低流量氧合(LFO)和经鼻湿化快速充气通气交换(THRIVE)是两种供氧技术。我们试图比较它们在该患者队列中的效用。
回顾性队列研究。
回顾性研究35例声门下狭窄内镜清创术病例。各病例手术技术一致。采用LFO的23例患者在喉入口处以低流量输送氧气,采用THRIVE的12例患者在鼻孔处以高流量输送氧气。记录呼吸暂停时间、抢救通气需求以及相关患者和疾病因素的数据进行分析。
LFO组和THRIVE组的中位呼吸暂停时间分别为34分钟和25分钟。与THRIVE组相比,LFO组更常需要间歇性声门上喷射通气进行抢救(61%对33%),除1例患者外,其余病例均足以完成手术。BMI升高是LFO组早期氧饱和度下降的唯一显著预测因素(24.8对37.95kg/m²,P = 0.002)。中位狭窄直径为6mm(范围2 - 14mm)。
窒息技术对于各种严重程度的声门下狭窄的内镜治疗是安全可行的。BMI升高是早期氧饱和度下降的唯一显著预测因素。在许多无法使用THRIVE的医疗机构中,对于非肥胖患者,LFO是一种有效的替代方法。《喉镜》,2022年,132:1231 - 1236。