Journals / Journal of Contemporary Medicine / 2020 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2

Assessment of Difficult Intubation Predictors in Different Populations of Turkey

Pages
243–247
Publication Date
2020-06-25
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The positive predictive values were increased with increasing combinations, but further research is needed on the predictors of difficult intubation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Difficult tracheal intubation is defined when tracheal intubation requires multiple attempts, in the presence or absence of tracheal pathology.
📊
Key Findings & Data:According to the population in the regions, 24 experienced anesthesiologists from 13 hospitals in 7 regions, were included in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The positive predictive values were increased with increasing combinations, but further research is needed on the predictors of difficult intubation.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Anthropometric measurements · Airway Management · Demography

Abstract

Difficult tracheal intubation is defined when tracheal intubation requires multiple attempts, in the presence or absence of tracheal pathology. Most importantly, difficult intubation differs between countries and populations. Physicians should be aware of difficult intubation frequencies of their populations. Turkey is a transit country between East and West. Eastern Turkey reflects the Middle East and Asia, while western Turkey has European features. Our objectives were to investigate the frequency of difficult intubation in different regions’ populations, and specificity and sensitivity of predictive values. According to the population in the regions, 24 experienced anesthesiologists from 13 hospitals in 7 regions, were included in the study. Of 1313 patients, 143 patients (10.89%) were detected as difficult intubation. Mallampathy (MLP) III-IV were alone (p = 0.043), and the combination of thyromental distance <6 cm and MLP III-IV (p: 0.018) were statistically significant in difficult and easy intubation patient groups. The specificity was 97.46% in MLP + thyromental combination, and 98.05% in MLP + mouth opening combination. Western region had the shortest measurements in sternomental, thyromental and mouth opening (p <0.05), and had the most difficult intubation frequency compared to the other regions (p: 0.001). The positive predictive values were increased with increasing combinations, but further research is needed on the predictors of difficult intubation.

🔖

Cite This Article

KEPEKÇİ, A. B., ERDOĞAN, E., YAVAŞÇA, H. P., TELLİ, S. (2020). Assessment of Difficult Intubation Predictors in Different Populations of Turkey. Journal of Contemporary Medicine, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2, 243–247. https://ajindex.com/articles/775167

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Apfelbaum JL, Hagberg CA, Caplan RA, Blitt CD, Connis RT, Nickinovich DG, et al. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airwayan updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists task force on management of the difficult airway. Anesthesiology: The Journal of the American Society of Anesthesiologists. 2013;118(2):251-70.
  2. Edelman D, Perkins E, Brewster D. Difficult airway management algorithms: a directed review. Anaesthesia. 2019;74(9):1175-85.
  3. Langeron O, Bourgain J-L, Francon D, Amour J, Baillard C, Bouroche G, et al. Difficult intubation and extubation in adult anaesthesia. Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine. 2018;37(6):639-51.
  4. Law JA, Broemling N, Cooper RM, Drolet P, Duggan LV, Griesdale DE, et al. The difficult airway with recommendations for management–part 2–the anticipated difficult airway. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie. 2013;60(11):1119-38.
  5. Frerk C, Mitchell VS, McNarry AF, Mendonca C, Bhagrath R, Patel aA, et al. Difficult Airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults. BJA: British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2015;115(6):827-48.
  6. Janssens M, Hartstein G. Management of difficult intubation. European journal of anaesthesiology. 2001;18(1):3-12.
  7. Lakhe G, Poudel H, Adhikari KM. Assessment of Airway Parameters for Predicting Difficult Laryngoscopy and Intubation in a Tertiary Center in Western Nepal. Journal of Nepal Health Research Council. 2019;17(4):516-20.
  8. Shah PN, Sundaram V. Incidence and predictors of difficult mask ventilation and intubation. Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. 2012;28(4):451. Baillard C, Boubaya M, Statescu E, Collet M, Solis A, Guezennec J, et al. Incidence and risk factors of hypoxaemia after preoxygenation at induction of anaesthesia. British journal of anaesthesia. 2019;122(3):388-94. Deniz O. Van City in Terms of Refuge Mobilitıes and The Demographic Profile of Refugees Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi. 2009;14(22):187-204.
  9. Rao KVN, Dhatchinamoorthi D, Nandhakumar A, Selvarajan N, Akula HR, Thiruvenkatarajan V. Validity of thyromental height test as a predictor of difficult laryngoscopy: A prospective evaluation comparing modified Mallampati score, interincisor gap, thyromental distance, neck circumference, and neck extension. Indian journal of anaesthesia. 2018;62(8):603. Iohom G, Ronayne M, Cunningham A. Prediction of difficult tracheal intubation. European journal of anaesthesiology. 2003;20(1):31-6. Kandemir T