Emergency front-of-neck access in infants: A pragmatic crossover randomized control trial comparing two approaches on a simulated rabbit model.

BACKGROUND: Rapid-sequence tracheotomy and scalpel-bougie tracheotomy are two published approaches for establishing emergency front-of-neck access in infants. It is unknown whether there is a difference in performance times and success rates between the two approaches. AIMS: The aim of this cross-over randomized control trial study was to investigate whether the two approaches were equivalent for establishing tracheal access in rabbit cadavers. The underlying hypothesis was that the time to achieve the tracheal access is the same with both techniques. METHODS: Between May and September 2022, thirty physicians (pediatric anesthesiologists and intensivists) were randomized to perform front-of-neck access using one and then the other technique: rapid-sequence tracheotomy and scalpel-bougie tracheotomy. After watching training videos, each technique was practiced four times followed by a final tracheotomy during which study measurements were obtained. Based on existing data, an equivalence margin was set at ∆ = ±10 s for the duration of the procedure. The primary outcome was defined as the duration until tracheal tube placement was achieved successfully. Secondary outcomes included success rate, structural injuries, and subjective participant self-evaluation. RESULTS: The median duration of the scalpel-bougie tracheotomy was 48 s (95% CI: 37-57), while the duration of the rapid-sequence tracheotomy was 59 s (95% CI: 49-66, p = .07). The difference in the median duration between the two approaches was 11 s (95% CI: -4.9 to 29). The overall success rate was 93.3% (95% CI: 83.8%-98.2%). The scalpel-bougie tracheotomy resulted in significantly fewer damaged tracheal rings and was preferred among participants. CONCLUSIONS: The scalpel-bougie tracheotomy was slightly faster than the rapid-sequence tracheotomy and favored by participants, with fewer tracheal injuries. Therefore, we propose the scalpel-bougie tracheostomy as a rescue approach favoring the similarity to the adult approach for small children. The use of a comparable equipment kit for both children and adults facilitates standardization, performance, and logistics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05499273.

Airway management in neonates and infants: European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and British Journal of Anaesthesia joint guidelines.

Airway management is required during general anaesthesia and is essential for life-threatening conditions such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Evidence from recent trials indicates a high incidence of critical events during airway management, especially in neonates or infants. It is important to define the optimal techniques and strategies for airway management in these groups. In this joint European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) and British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) guideline on airway management in neonates and infants, we present aggregated and evidence-based recommendations to assist clinicians in providing safe and effective medical care. We identified seven main areas of interest for airway management: i) preoperative assessment and preparation; ii) medications; iii) techniques and algorithms; iv) identification and treatment of difficult airways; v) confirmation of tracheal intubation; vi) tracheal extubation, and vii) human factors. Based on these areas, Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) questions were derived that guided a structured literature search. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to formulate the recommendations based on those studies included with consideration of their methodological quality (strong '1' or weak '2' recommendation with high 'A', medium 'B' or low 'C' quality of evidence). In summary, we recommend: 1. Use medical history and physical examination to predict difficult airway management (1C). 2. Ensure adequate level of sedation or general anaesthesia during airway management (1B). 3. Administer neuromuscular blocker before tracheal intubation when spontaneous breathing is not necessary (1C). 4. Use a videolaryngoscope with an age-adapted standard blade as first choice for tracheal intubation (1B). 5. Apply apnoeic oxygenation during tracheal intubation in neonates (1B). 6. Consider a supraglottic airway for rescue oxygenation and ventilation when tracheal intubation fails (1B). 7. Limit the number of tracheal intubation attempts (1C). 8. Use a stylet to reinforce and preshape tracheal tubes when hyperangulated videolaryngoscope blades are used and when the larynx is anatomically anterior (1C). 9. Verify intubation is successful with clinical assessment and end-tidal CO2 waveform (1C). 10. Apply high-flow nasal oxygenation, continuous positive airway pressure or nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation for postextubation respiratory support, when appropriate (1B).

Apnoeic oxygenation during paediatric tracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Supplemental oxygen administration by apnoeic oxygenation during laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation is intended to prolong safe apnoea time, reduce the risk of hypoxaemia, and increase the success rate of first-attempt tracheal intubation under general anaesthesia. This systematic review examined the efficacy and effectiveness of apnoeic oxygenation during tracheal intubation in children. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis included randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies in paediatric patients requiring tracheal intubation, evaluating apnoeic oxygenation by any method compared with patients without apnoeic oxygenation. Searched databases were MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to March 22, 2023. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) recommendation. RESULTS: After initial selection of 40 708 articles, 15 studies summarising 9802 children were included (10 randomised controlled trials, four pre-post studies, one prospective observational study) published between 1988 and 2023. Eight randomised controlled trials were included for meta-analysis (n=1070 children; 803 from operating theatres, 267 from neonatal intensive care units). Apnoeic oxygenation increased intubation first-pass success with no physiological instability (risk ratio [RR] 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.57, P=0.04, I2=0), higher oxygen saturation during intubation (mean difference 3.6%, 95% CI 0.8-6.5%, P=0.02, I2=63%), and decreased incidence of hypoxaemia (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.17-0.33, P<0.01, I2=51%) compared with no supplementary oxygen administration. CONCLUSION: This systematic review with meta-analysis confirms that apnoeic oxygenation during tracheal intubation of children significantly increases first-pass intubation success rate. Furthermore, apnoeic oxygenation enables stable physiological conditions by maintaining oxygen saturation within the normal range. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Protocol registered prospectively on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022369000) on December 2, 2022.

Airway management in neonates and infants: European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and British Journal of Anaesthesia joint guidelines.

Airway management is required during general anaesthesia and is essential for life-threatening conditions such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Evidence from recent trials indicates a high incidence of critical events during airway management, especially in neonates or infants. It is important to define the optimal techniques and strategies for airway management in these groups. In this joint European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) and British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) guideline on airway management in neonates and infants, we present aggregated and evidence-based recommendations to assist clinicians in providing safe and effective medical care. We identified seven main areas of interest for airway management: i) preoperative assessment and preparation; ii) medications; iii) techniques and algorithms; iv) identification and treatment of difficult airways; v) confirmation of tracheal intubation; vi) tracheal extubation, and vii) human factors. Based on these areas, Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) questions were derived that guided a structured literature search. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to formulate the recommendations based on those studies included with consideration of their methodological quality (strong '1' or weak '2' recommendation with high 'A', medium 'B' or low 'C' quality of evidence). In summary, we recommend: 1. Use medical history and physical examination to predict difficult airway management (1С). 2. Ensure adequate level of sedation or general anaesthesia during airway management (1B). 3. Administer neuromuscular blocker before tracheal intubation when spontaneous breathing is not necessary (1С). 4. Use a videolaryngoscope with an age-adapted standard blade as first choice for tracheal intubation (1B). 5. Apply apnoeic oxygenation during tracheal intubation in neonates (1B). 6. Consider a supraglottic airway for rescue oxygenation and ventilation when tracheal intubation fails (1B). 7. Limit the number of tracheal intubation attempts (1C). 8. Use a stylet to reinforce and preshape tracheal tubes when hyperangulated videolaryngoscope blades are used and when the larynx is anatomically anterior (1C). 9. Verify intubation is successful with clinical assessment and end-tidal CO 2 waveform (1C). 10. Apply high-flow nasal oxygenation, continuous positive airway pressure or nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation for postextubation respiratory support, when appropriate (1B).

Electrolytes, albumin and acid base equilibrium during laparoscopic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgery, causing inflammation, disrupts endothelial permeability leading to movement of fluids and albumin across the vascular barrier. Fluid therapy for restoring circulatory homeostasis may lead to positive fluid balance which has been shown to increase morbidity and mortality in surgical patients. The current investigation aims to describe physio-pathological changes in circulating albumin, fluid and electrolyte balance, and acid-base equilibrium in a cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia. METHODS: Single-center prospective observational study. Patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery were screened for eligibility. Before surgery, the baseline fasting conditions were homogenized. Hemoglobin, urinary and plasmatic were collected before surgery and then at pre-defined timepoints. Albumin/creatinine ratio was measured before and after surgery. Expected and actual circulating Sodium concentrations were compared according to a physiological theoretical model. Assessment and quantification of changes in major electrolytes, albumin and acid-base balance was defined as the primary outcome of the study. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were enrolled in the protocol. Patients had a positive electrolytes (Na+ 295 [244-375] mmol, Cl- 234 [195-295] mmol, K+ 16.8 [12.0-21.4] mmol) and fluid balance (2165 [1727-2728] mL). The positive fluid balance was associated with stable chloride (105 [103-107], end study vs. 103 [102-106] mmol/L, baseline, P not significant) and potassium (4.2 [3.8-4.4], end study vs. 4.1 [3.6-4.4] mmol/L, baseline, P not significant) levels, but sodium concentrations decreased over time (138 [137-140], end study vs. 139 [138-141] mmol/L, baseline, P<0.05). The albumin/creatinine ratio was higher at the end of surgery 134 [61-267] vs. 7 [4-14], P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Data from patients undergoing colorectal laparoscopic surgery showed a positive fluid balance, decreased circulating albumin and increased albuminuria. A positive sodium balance was not always associated with an increase in sodium plasma concentration.

The assessment of esophageal pressure using different devices: a validation study.

BACKGROUND: Although esophageal pressure measurement could help clinicians to improve the ventilatory management of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients, it has been mainly used in clinical research. Aim of this study was to compare the measurements of end-expiratory esophageal pressure, end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure and lung stress by three systems: a dedicated manual device, taken as gold standard, a new automatic system (Optivent) and a bedside equipment, consisting of a mechanical ventilator and a hemodynamic monitor. METHODS: In sedated and paralyzed mechanically ventilated ARDS patients the esophageal pressure was measured at three PEEP levels in random fashion (baseline level, 50% higher and 50% lower). RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled (BMI 25 [23-28] kg/m2, PaO2/FiO2 187 [137-223] and PEEP 9±3 cmH2O). The mean esophageal pressure measured during an expiratory pause by the dedicated system, the bedside system and Optivent were 10.0±4.2, 10±4 and 9.9±4.0 cmH2O, respectively. The respective bias and limits of agreement between the dedicated system and Optivent and between the dedicated system and the bedside system were as follows: end-expiratory esophageal pressure, 0.2 cmH2O, (-0.4 to 0.9) and -0.1 cmH2O (-1.9 to 1.7); end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure, -0.6 cmH2O (-1.7 to 0.4) and -0.4 cmH2O, (-2.2 to 1.5); lung stress -0.9 cmH2O (-3.0 to 1.1) and -1.5 cmH2O (-4.4 to 1.4). CONCLUSIONS: Both Optivent and the bedside system showed clinically acceptability if compared to the gold standard device. The possibility to apply one of these systems could allow a wider use of esophageal pressure in clinical practice.

Oesophageal pressure and respiratory muscle ultrasonographic measurements indicate inspiratory effort during pressure support ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Bedside measures of patient effort are essential to properly titrate the level of pressure support ventilation. We investigated whether the tidal swing in oesophageal (ΔPes) and transdiaphragmatic pressure (ΔPdi), and ultrasonographic changes in diaphragm (TFdi) and parasternal intercostal (TFic) thickening are reliable estimates of respiratory effort. The effect of diaphragm dysfunction was also considered. METHODS: Twenty-one critically ill patients were enrolled: age 73 (14) yr, BMI 27 (7) kg m-2, and Pao2/Fio2 33.3 (9.2) kPa. A three-level pressure support trial was performed: baseline, 25% (PS-medium), and 50% reduction (PS-low). We recorded the oesophageal and transdiaphragmatic pressure-time products (PTPs), work of breathing (WOB), and diaphragm and intercostal ultrasonography. Diaphragm dysfunction was defined by the Gilbert index. RESULTS: Pressure support was 9.0 (1.6) cm H2O at baseline, 6.7 (1.3) (PS-medium), and 4.4 (1.0) (PS-low). ΔPes was significantly associated with the oesophageal PTP (R2=0.868; P<0.001) and the WOB (R2=0.683; P<0.001). ΔPdi was significantly associated with the transdiaphragmatic PTP (R2=0.820; P<0.001). TFdi was only weakly correlated with the oesophageal PTP (R2=0.326; P<0.001), and the correlation improved after excluding patients with diaphragm dysfunction (R2=0.887; P<0.001). TFdi was higher and TFic lower in patients without diaphragm dysfunction: 33.6 (18.2)% vs 13.2 (9.2)% and 2.1 (1.7)% vs 12.7 (9.1)%; P<0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: ΔPes and ΔPdi are adequate estimates of inspiratory effort. Diaphragm ultrasonography is a reliable indicator of inspiratory effort in the absence of diaphragm dysfunction. Additional measurement of parasternal intercostal thickening may discriminate a low inspiratory effort or a high effort in the presence of a dysfunctional diaphragm.