Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Biomedical Engineering, Orthopaedic Bioengineering Research Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
the Department of Anesthesia, University of Iowa Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa.
Anesthesiology. 2021 Dec 1;135(6):1055-1065. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000004024.
In a closed claims study, most patients experiencing cervical spinal cord injury had stable cervical spines. This raises two questions. First, in the presence of an intact (stable) cervical spine, are there tracheal intubation conditions in which cervical intervertebral motions exceed physiologically normal maximum values? Second, with an intact spine, are there tracheal intubation conditions in which potentially injurious cervical cord strains can occur?
This study utilized a computational model of the cervical spine and cord to predict intervertebral motions (rotation, translation) and cord strains (stretch, compression). Routine (Macintosh) intubation force conditions were defined by a specific application location (mid-C3 vertebral body), magnitude (48.8 N), and direction (70 degrees). A total of 48 intubation conditions were modeled: all combinations of 4 force locations (cephalad and caudad of routine), 4 magnitudes (50 to 200% of routine), and 3 directions (50, 70, and 90 degrees). Modeled maximum intervertebral motions were compared to motions reported in previous clinical studies of the range of voluntary cervical motion. Modeled peak cord strains were compared to potential strain injury thresholds.
Modeled maximum intervertebral motions occurred with maximum force magnitude (97.6 N) and did not differ from physiologically normal maximum motion values. Peak tensile cord strains (stretch) did not exceed the potential injury threshold (0.14) in any of the 48 force conditions. Peak compressive strains exceeded the potential injury threshold (-0.20) in 3 of 48 conditions, all with maximum force magnitude applied in a nonroutine location.
With an intact cervical spine, even with application of twice the routine value of force magnitude, intervertebral motions during intubation did not exceed physiologically normal maximum values. However, under nonroutine high-force conditions, compressive strains exceeded potentially injurious values. In patients whose cords have less than normal tolerance to acute strain, compressive strains occurring with routine intubation forces may reach potentially injurious values.
在一项封闭的理赔研究中,大多数患有颈椎脊髓损伤的患者颈椎稳定。这引发了两个问题。首先,在颈椎完整(稳定)的情况下,是否存在气管插管条件使颈椎椎间运动超过生理正常最大值?其次,在脊柱完整的情况下,是否存在可能导致脊髓损伤的气管插管条件?
本研究利用颈椎和脊髓的计算模型来预测椎间运动(旋转、平移)和脊髓应变(拉伸、压缩)。常规(Macintosh)插管力条件由特定的应用位置(C3 椎体中部)、大小(48.8 N)和方向(70 度)定义。共模拟了 48 种插管条件:常规应用位置(头侧和尾侧)、大小(常规的 50%到 200%)和方向(50、70 和 90 度)的所有组合。比较模型预测的最大椎间运动与先前颈椎运动自主范围的临床研究中报道的运动。比较模型预测的峰值脊髓应变与潜在的应变损伤阈值。
最大椎间运动发生在最大力值(97.6 N)时,与生理正常最大运动值无差异。在 48 种力条件中的任何一种情况下,峰值拉伸脊髓应变(拉伸)均未超过潜在损伤阈值(0.14)。在 3 种 48 种力条件中的 3 种情况下,峰值压缩应变超过了潜在的损伤阈值(-0.20),均采用非常规的最大力值。
在颈椎完整的情况下,即使施加常规力值的两倍,插管过程中的椎间运动也不会超过生理正常的最大值。然而,在非常规高力条件下,压缩应变超过了潜在的损伤值。对于那些脊髓对急性应变的耐受能力低于正常水平的患者,常规插管力引起的压缩应变可能达到潜在的损伤值。