Difficult intubation in ENT patient: Simultaneous videolaryngoscopy with flexible bronchoscopy. A combined approach. Case report.

INTRODUCTION: Difficult intubation is the situation when a skilled anesthetist has difficulties to manage airway using face mask, laryngoscopy, supraglottic device, tracheal intubation, surgery. Videolaryngoscope and flexible fibroscope (FFS) represent valid alternatives for difficult airway management, with some limitations. However, literature lacks of studies about the efficacy of the combined use of videolaryngoscope and FFS. CASE REPORT: We report a case of a man, with glottic lesion, who needs surgery under general anesthesia. Anesthesiologic pre-operative evaluation revealed that he's a difficult intubation case. So, in a supine position, intubation was performed on first attempt by videolaryngoscope combined with FFS. On post-op, no signs of injuries due to intubation have been found. DISCUSSION: In 2022, the American Society of Anesthesiologists defined the guidelines to manage difficult intubation: based on patient' anatomical and clinical feature and anesthetist' skills, several intubation procedures could be used. Each procedure has pros and cons. CONCLUSION: It's the first case of anticipated difficult intubation in adult man that was intubated under general anesthesia by using videolaryngoscope combined with FFS. We demonstrated that this procedure is safe and useful in case of difficult airway and recommended in case of laryngeal lesions that hinder the visualization of glottic plane.

The Efficacy of Continuous Serratus Anterior and Erector Spinae Plane Blocks vs Intercostal Nerve Block in Uniportal-Vats Surgery: A Propensity-Matched Prospective Trial.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of continuous erector spinae plane block(c-ESPB) and serratus anterior plane block(c-SAPB) versus the intercostal nerve block (ICNB) in Uniportal-VATS in terms of pain control, drug consumption, and complications. METHODS: Ninety-three consecutive patients, undergone one of the three peripheral nerve blocks after Uniportal-VATS, were prospectively enrolled. A 1:1 propensity score matching was used to minimize bias. RESULTS: C-ESPB and c-SAPB groups had no difference in morphine request upon awakening compared to ICNB. A higher VAS-score was recorded in c-ESPB compared to ICNB in the first 12 h after surgery. A significantly lower consumption of paracetamol in II postoperative day (p.o.d.) and tramadol in I and II p.o.d. was recorded in the c-ESPB group compared to the ICNB group. A higher dynamic VAS score was recorded at 24 h and 48 h in the ICNB group compared to the c-SAPB. No difference was found in safety, VAS-score and drug consumption between c-ESPB and c-SAPB at any given time, except for a higher tramadol request in c-SAPB in II p.o.d. CONCLUSIONS: C-ESPB and c-SAPB appear to have the same safety and analgesic efficacy when compared between them and to ICNB in Uniportal-VATS approach. C-ESPB showed a delayed onset of analgesic effect and a lower postoperative drug consumption compared to ICNB.