Total views : 343

Comparative Evaluation of Fastrach Silicone Wire-Reinforced Tube, Polyvinyl Chloride Tube and PVC Armoured Tube for Blind Tracheal Intubation through the Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway

Affiliations

  • Department of Anaesthesiology, Acharya Shri Chander College of Medical Sciences and Hospital, Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir, India
  • Department of Anaesthesiology, Acharya Shri Chander College of Medical Sciences and Hospital, Jammu – 180017, Jammu and Kashmir, India

Abstract


Background and Aims: The reusable Fastrach silicone wire reinforced tube (FTST) was designed for tracheal intubation through the intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA). The polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tube and the PVC armoured tube (PAT) are disposable, cheaper and readily available as compared to the FTST. Hence, we decided to compare the clinical performance of these 3 types of tubes for tracheal intubation through the ILMA. Methods: Ninety patients between 18-65 years with ASA class I and II and Mallampati Grading I and II undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia were enrolled for this prospective, randomised study. Patients were divided randomly into three groups consisting of 30 patients each, to undergo intubation by FTST, PVC, PAT tubes through an ILMA. Overall success rate, ease of insertion, the number of attempts for successful intubation, critical incidence during intubation and post-operative sore throat were compared. Data was compiled and analysed using appropriate statistical tests and value of p<0.05 was considered significant. Results: The overall success rate was 100% in all groups; the first-attempt success rate was 90% with FTST compared to 83.33% with PVC and 60% with PAT. The time taken for intubation was 9.57±1.77 s in FTST group, 13.70±3.20 s in PVC and 15.13±2.94 s in PAT group. The incidence a of sore throat was 53.33% in PVC and 50% in PAT as compared with 26.66% in FTST group. Conclusion: The FTST is superior to PVC and PAT for intubation through an ILMA. PVC and PAT can be considered as an alternative to FTST in normal patients and their intubation success rates can be improved by using various manoeuvres for tube placement.

Keywords

Fastrach Silicon Wire-Reinforced Tracheal Tube, Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway, Polyvinyl Chloride Tracheal Tube, PVC Armoured Tube.

Full Text:

 |  (PDF views: 121)

References


  • King BD, Harris LC, Greifenstein FE. Reflex circulatory responses to direct laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation performed during general anaesthesia. Anesthesiology 1951;12: 556–66.
  • Wycoff CC. Endotracheal intubation: Effects on blood pressure and pulse rate. Anesthesiology 1960;21:153–58.
  • Brain AIJ. The LMA-A new concept in airway mangement. Br J Anaesth 1983;55:801–05.
  • Brain AI, Verghese C, Addy EV, Kaplia A. The intubating laryngeal mask, I: Development of a new device for intubation of the trachea. Br J Anaesth 1997;79:699–703.
  • Brain AI, Verghese C, Addy EV, Kaplia A, Brimacombe J. The intubating laryngeal mask, II: a preliminary clinical report of a new means of intubating the trachea. Br J Anaesth 1997;79:704–09.
  • Gerstein NS, Braude DA, Hung O, Sanders JC, Murphy ME. The Fastrach intubating laryngeal mask airway: an overview and update. Can J Anaesth 2010;57:588–601.
  • Kapila A, Addy EV, Verghese C. The intubating laryngeal mask airway: an initial assessment and performance. Br J Anaesth 1997;79:710–13.
  • Brimacombe JR. Difficult airway management with the Intubating laryngeal mask. Anesth Analg 1997;85:1173–5.
  • Ferson DZ, Rosenblatt WH, Johansen MJ. Use of the intubating LMA-Fastrach in 254 patients with difficult-to-manage airways. Anesthesiology 2001;95:1175–81.
  • Fukotome T, Amaha K, Nakazawa K. Tracheal inubation through the intubating laryngeal mask airway in patients with difficult airway. Anesth Intens Care 1998;26:387–91.
  • Kanazi GE, El-Khatib M, Nasr VG, Kaddoum R, Al-Alami A, Baraka AS, et al. A comparison of a silicone wire-reinforced tube with the parker and polyvinyl chloride tubes for tracheal intubation through an intubating laryngeal mask airway in patients with normal airways undergoing general anesthesia. Anesth Analg 2008;107(3):994–97.
  • Kundra P, Sujata N, Ravishankar M. Conventional tracheal tubes for intubation through the intubating laryngeal mask airway. Anesth Analg 2005;100(1):284–8.
  • Joo HS, Kataoka MT, Chen RJ, Doyle J, Mazer CD. PVC tracheal tubes exert forces and pressures seven to ten times higher than silicone or armoured tracheal tubes-an in vitro study. Can J Anaesth 2002;49(9):986– 9.
  • Ye L, Liu J, Wong DT, Zhu T. Effects of tracheal tube orientation on the success of intubation through an intubating laryngeal mask airway: studyin Mallampati class 3 o 4 patients. Br J Anaesth 2009;102(2):269– 72.
  • Joo HS, Rose DK. The intubating laryngeal mask airway with and without fiberoptic guidance. Anesth Analg 1999;88:662–6.
  • Lu PP, Yang CH, Ho AC, Shyr MH. The intubating LMA: a comparison of insertion techniques with conventional tracheal tubes. Can J Anaesth 2000;47:849–53.
  • Murashima K, Fukutome T, Brimacombe J. A comparison of two siliconereinforced tracheal tubes with different bevels for use with the intubating laryngeal mask. Anaesthesia. 1999;54(12):1198–200.
  • Combes X, Sauvat S, Leroux B, Dumerat M, Sherrer E, Motamed C, et al. Intubating laryngeal mask airway in morbidly obese and lean patients: A comparative study. Anesthesiology 2005 Jun;102(6):1106–9.
  • Avidan MS, Harvey A, Chitkara N. The intubating laryngeal mask airway compared with direct laryngoscopy. Br J Anaesth 1999;83:615–17.
  • Shah VR, Bhosale GP, Mehta T, Parikh GP. A comparison of conventional endotracheal tube with silicone wire-reinforced tracheal tube for intubation through intubating laryngeal mask airway. Saudi J Anaesth 2014;8:183–7.
  • Sreeramalu SK, PrashanthPrabhu J, Gopal S. Comparison between poly vinyl chloride (PVC) tube and intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA) tube for intubation through intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA/Lma-Fastrach) in Mallampati (MP) 3 and 4 patients. J of Evidence Based Med and Healthcare 1:955–61.