CJEM Articles: intubation
Displaying 1-8 of 8 results
-
January
2011
13
1
Lance Brown, Rishi Bhargava
Objective: The objective of this study was to describe our experience removing esophageal coins from children in a tertiary care pediatric emergency department over a 4-year period.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed a continuous quality improvement data set spanning October 1, 2004, through September 30, 2008.
Results: In 96 of 101 cases (95%), emergency physicians successfully retrieved the coin. The median age of the children was 19 months (interquartile range [IQR] 13–43 months; range 4 months–12.8 years). The median time to removal of coin from initiation of intubation was 8 minutes (IQR 4–14 minutes; range 1–60 minutes). Coins were extracted using forceps only in 56 cases, whereas forceps and a Foley catheter were used in the remainder. Succinylcholine and etomidate were used in almost all cases for rapid sequence intubation prior to coin removal. Complications were identified in 46 cases: minor bleeding (13), lip laceration (7), multiple attempts (5), hypoxia (3), accidental extubation (3), dental injuries (3), bradycardia (2), coin advanced (1), right main-stem bronchus intubation (1), and other (8).
Conclusions: Emergency physicians successfully removed esophageal coins following rapid sequence intubation in most cases. Our approach may be considered for the management of pediatric esophageal coins, particularly in an academic pediatric emergency department. -
January
2011
13
1
Carolyn Kelly-Smith, Corinne Hohl
-
September
2006
8
5
Peter J. Zed, Richard S. Slavik, Riyad B. Abu-Laban, Vincent H. Mabasa
-
September
2006
8
5
Marco L.A. Sivilotti
-
March
2006
8
2
David W. Harrison, Nick Kuzak, Peter J. Zed
Introduction: Autoregulation is dysfunctional in the injured brain. Increases in intracranial and arterial pressure may therefore result in extension of the primary injury. Rapid sequence intubation (RSI) is a well-known cause of surges in both arterial pressure and intracranial pressure. Neuroprotective agents, namely lidocaine and fentanyl, have the potential to minimize the pressure surges implicated in secondary brain injury. The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency with which neuroprotective agents were used for neuroprotective RSI in the emergency department.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all 139 patients intubated in the emergency department of Vancouver General Hospital between March and October 2003. Patients were eligible if there was an indication for neuroprotective agents defined as presumed intracranial pathology and a mean arterial pressure (MAP) > 85 mm Hg. Contraindications to fentanyl included MAP < 85 mm Hg or allergy to fentanyl.
Results: Seventy-seven patients were intubated for primary neurological indications. Indication for intubation included non-traumatic causes (n = 37) (including cerebrovascular accident or intracranial hemorrhage) and closed head injury (n = 40). The mean age (± standard deviation) was 52.3 ± 20.4 years, and 31.4% were female. Fifty-seven (74.0%) patients had indications for neuroprotective agents, without contraindications. When neuroprotective agents were indicated, lidocaine was used in 84.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 72.6%–91.5%) of patients while fentanyl was used in 33.3% (95%CI 22.4%–46.3%) of patients. Eleven percent of the intubations were performed with a fentanyl dose of ≥ 2 mcg/kg, which is the lower limit considered effective.
Conclusions: Despite the potential benefit of using lidocaine and fentanyl in appropriate patients undergoing neuroprotective RSI in the emergency department, our study identified a significant underutilization of optimal premedication. The identification of barriers to use and the implementation of strategies to optimize use are necessary. -
November
2004
6
6
Ameer P. Mody, Aqeel Khan, Besh B. Barcega, Edward J. Vargas, James A. Moynihan, Lance Brown, Robin T. Clark, T. Kent Denmark, Tommy Y. Kim
Objective: There are few reports in the medical literature describing removal of a coin from the upper esophageal tract of a child by an emergency physician. However, given the nature of their training and practice, emergency physicians are well suited to perform this common procedure. We describe our experience with this procedure.
Methods: This was a retrospective review of a continuous quality improvement data set from a university-based tertiary care pediatric emergency department between Nov. 1, 2003, and Mar. 31, 2004.
Results: Thirteen children, with a median age of 20 months, underwent rapid sequence intubation and had coins successfully removed from their upper esophageal tract by emergency physicians. In 10 cases, the coin was visible at laryngoscopy and removed with Magill forceps. In 3 cases this approach failed and a Foley catheter was used to remove the coin. One child suffered a tonsillar abrasion and two sustained minor lip trauma, but all were extubated and discharged home from the emergency department with no significant complications. Eleven of the 13 patients were successfully followed up, and the parents reported no problems.
Conclusions: This pilot study suggests that the removal of a coin from the upper esophageal tract by an emergency physician can be both safe and effective. A larger study is needed before this procedure can be generally recommended.
-
January
2002
4
1
Kenneth C. Dittrich
It is important for clinicians to be aware of the sensitivity and limitations of commonly used methods to confirm endotracheal tube placement. Overreliance on insensitive indicators can lead to delayed recognition of esophageal intubation. The case presented highlights this concern.
-
July
2001
2
3
Brian Morris, Dennis St. Pierre, Glen Bandiera, P. Richard Verbeek
Objectives: Our goals were to determine whether selection bias occurred in a prehospital study comparing an esophageal detector device (EDD) to a disposable capnometer for detecting esophageal intubation, and to determine whether such a bias would have changed the study’s conclusions about EDD effectiveness.
Methods: In a study of patients requiring prehospital intubation, we determined the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the EDD for detecting esophageal intubation. We then compared intubation success rate in patients who were enrolled in the study (n = 129) to that in eligible patients who were excluded from it (n = 107). After finding that the incidence of failed intubation was higher in the “excluded” group, we used sensitivity and specificity parameters derived from the study population to assess whether EDD test characteristics would differ in studied vs. excluded patients.
Results: The first intubation attempt was successful in 125 of 129 study patients and 76 of 107 excluded patients (97% vs. 71%, p = 0.03), confirming the presence of selection bias. The negative predictive value of the EDD for esophageal intubation was 98% in the study cohort and would have been 77% in patients like those excluded (i.e., difficult intubation cases).
Conclusion: The high “first attempt” intubation success rate seen in this study was due to selective exclusion of failed intubations. This selection bias led to a clinically important overestimation of the EDD’s negative predictive value. Bias may substantially alter the estimations of test accuracy reported in scientific studies. To reduce the chance of unrecognized selection bias in studies of diagnostic tests, investigators must determine whether recruited subjects resemble patients in whom the test will ultimately be used.
