Anesth Analg 1999;88:766
© 1999 International Anesthesia Research Society
CRITICAL CARE AND TRAUMA
The Assessment of Four Different Methods to Verify Tracheal Tube Placement in the Critical Care Setting
Sylvia Knapp, MD,
Julia Kofler, MD,
Brigitte Stoiser, MD,
Florian Thalhammer, MD,
Heinz Burgmann, MD,
Martin Posch, PhD,
Roland Hofbauer, MD,
Margit Stanzel, MD, and
Michael Frass, MD
Department of Internal Medicine I and Department of Medical Statistics, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Sylvia Knapp, MD, Department of Internal Medicine I, Waehringer Guertel 18–20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Address e-mail to sylvia.knapp{at}akh-wien.ac.at
One of the most serious complications of conventional endotracheal intubation is unidentified placement of the tube in the esophagus. The aim of our study was to evaluate four different methods for immediate detection of the tube position: auscultation, capnographic determination of ETCO2, esophageal detection method (EDM) using a self-inflating bulb, and the transillumination method using a lighted stylet (TrachlightTM; Laerdal, Armonk, NY). Thirty-eight endotracheally intubated patients admitted to our medical intensive care unit were enrolled in the study. A second identical tube was inserted into the esophagus under laryngoscopic control. The endotracheal tube was then disconnected from the ventilator. Two blinded examiners, one experienced, the other inexperienced, determined the tube position within 30 s using one of the four methods. The order of the tubes tested and the methods used were randomized. In 130 of 152 examinations, both examiners correctly diagnosed the position of the tube. The wrong result was obtained by both examiners 4 times; only the experienced examiner was wrong 4 times, and only the inexperienced examiner was wrong 14 times. Using ETCO2, both examiners were correct in all cases. Auscultation showed an obvious relation to the examiner’s experience: the experienced examiner was correct in all cases, the inexperienced examiner was correct in only 68% of cases. Using the self-inflating bulb, there were two wrong results of the experienced examiner and one wrong result of the inexperienced examiner. The transillumination technique was associated with a high error rate by both examiners (16% and 13%, respectively). Comparing all four methods showed that capnography is superior to auscultation (P = 0.0005) and to the TrachlightTM detection method (P = 0.0078). EDM was not statistically superior to auscultation and transillumination. Capnography was the most reliable method for rapid evaluation of tube position, followed by EDM, whereas auscultation and TrachlightTM did not seem to be of comparable value. Experience was a determining factor for auscultation.
Implications: To prevent unidentified esophageal intubation, a serious complication in the critical care setting, four methods for detecting tube position were tested by two examiners (one experienced, the other inexperienced) in endotracheally intubated patients after insertion of a second tube into the esophagus.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
B. Marciniak, P. Fayoux, A. Hebrard, R. Krivosic-Horber, T. Engelhardt, and B. Bissonnette
Airway Management in Children: Ultrasonography Assessment of Tracheal Intubation in Real Time?
Anesth. Analg.,
February 1, 2009;
108(2):
461 - 465.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. J. Lin, K. T. Chen, N. P. Foo, C.-C. Hsu, and H. R. Guo
Detection of oesophageal intubations using cuff pressures in a pig trachea oesophagus model
Br. J. Anaesth.,
November 1, 2007;
99(5):
740 - 743.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S Grmec and S Mally
Prehospital determination of tracheal tube placement in severe head injury
Emerg. Med. J.,
July 1, 2004;
21(4):
518 - 520.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End-Tidal CO2 Superior for Confirmation of Tracheal Tube Placement
Journal Watch Emergency Medicine,
June 1, 1999;
1999(601):
1 - 1.
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
