Chilakapati Sireesha, Mishra Sandeep K, Rudingwa Priya, Senthilnathan Muthapillai, Jha Ajay K, Parida Satyen
Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Puducherry, India.
Indian J Anaesth. 2025 May;69(5):458-464. doi: 10.4103/ija.ija_1117_24. Epub 2025 Apr 16.
Ring-Adair-Elwyn (RAE) tracheal tube is morphologically different from the routine endotracheal tubes. Unlike conventional endotracheal tubes, the passage of the RAE tube through the laryngopharynx and vocal cords might be challenging. We hypothesised that an oral RAE endotracheal tube railroaded over the Frova intubating introducer would reduce intubation time.
Eighty children with cleft lip and palate anomalies without additional difficult airway predictors were enroled. They were randomly assigned to two groups: Group Frova ( = 40), which received preloaded oral RAE tracheal tubes with a Frova intubating introducer, and Group Non-Frova ( = 40), which received oral RAE tracheal tubes without the Frova introducer. The primary outcome was the tracheal intubation time. Secondary outcomes were the first-attempt intubation success rate, the need for external laryngeal manoeuvres (ELMs), ease of intubation and airway complications.
The mean age (months) was 21 [standard deviation (SD): 14.2] in Group Frova and 20.7 (SD: 13.5) in Group Non-Frova. The mean intubation time (sec) was not different between Group Frova and Group Non-Frova [39.15 (SD: 15.39) (95% confidence interval {CI}: 31.3, 47.0) vs. 35.76 (SD: 15.29) (95% CI: 27.9, 43.6); mean difference = 3.39 (95% CI: -3.6, 10.41); = 0.338]. Furthermore, the first-attempt success rate was comparable between groups (34 vs. 29, = 0.308). There was no difference in the requirement of ELMs (13 vs. 17, = 0.261), and the ease of intubation was also comparable.
Frova introducer-guided endotracheal intubation with an oral RAE tube does not decrease intubation time in children undergoing cleft lip and palate surgery.
环形-阿代尔-埃尔温(RAE)气管导管在形态上与常规气管导管不同。与传统气管导管不同,RAE导管通过喉咽和声门可能具有挑战性。我们假设经弗罗瓦(Frova)插管引导器置入的口腔RAE气管导管可缩短插管时间。
纳入80例无其他困难气道预测因素的唇腭裂患儿。他们被随机分为两组:弗罗瓦组(n = 40),接受预装口腔RAE气管导管及弗罗瓦插管引导器;非弗罗瓦组(n = 40),接受无弗罗瓦引导器的口腔RAE气管导管。主要结局是气管插管时间。次要结局包括首次插管成功率、是否需要外部喉部操作(ELM)、插管难易程度及气道并发症。
弗罗瓦组的平均年龄(月)为21[标准差(SD):14.2],非弗罗瓦组为20.7(SD:13.5)。弗罗瓦组与非弗罗瓦组的平均插管时间(秒)无差异[39.15(SD:15.39)(95%置信区间{CI}:31.3,47.0)对35.76(SD:15.29)(95%CI:27.9,43.6);平均差值 = 3.39(95%CI:-3.6,10.41);P = 0.338]。此外,两组的首次尝试成功率相当(34比29,P = 0.308)。ELM的需求无差异(13比17,P = 0.261),插管难易程度也相当。
在唇腭裂手术患儿中,使用弗罗瓦引导器引导经口腔RAE导管进行气管插管并不能缩短插管时间。