JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Henderson, J. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Henderson, J. J.
Anesth Analg 2001;93:241
© 2001 International Anesthesia Research Society


LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

The Implications of Different Failed Endotracheal Intubation Rates

John J. Henderson, MB, FRCA

Anesthetic Department, Western Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland

To the Editor:

Heidegger et al. (1) compared their failed endotracheal intubation rate with that of Rose and Cohen (2). They state that, among other factors, the failed intubation rate depends on the study population. Other factors include the definitions used and departmental practice. Rose and Cohen’s failure rate of 0.3% refers only to the first technique attempted (2). Tracheal intubation was achieved with an alternative technique under the same general anesthetic in 31% of their "failed intubation" patients. Immediate awake intubation was successful in 33%. Thus, the true failure rate is about 0.1%. Rose and Cohen state that the failure rate of the first technique "may reflect a preference to discontinue attempts early and to proceed to alternative management prior to significant airway trauma." More frequent failure rates may be a consequence of practice designed to minimize airway trauma and indicate a high standard of care.

The failed intubation rate achieved by Heidegger et al. (1) is low. However, a few more details would increase the value of their report. The vocal cords could not be seen in 1016 patients, and 172 of these patients underwent secondary fiberoptic intubation. The authors gave detailed accounts of nine patients. Were the remaining 835 patients intubated within two attempts with the Macintosh laryngoscope? How many attempts were made, and what was their duration (median and range for both) in these 835 patients and in the 172 who had secondary fiberoptic intubation?

We wish to prevent hypoxic or soft tissue damage in difficult intubation patients. Good outcome is more important than the failed intubation rate.

References

  1. Heidegger T, Gerig HJ, Ulrich B, Kreienbühl G. Validation of a simple algorithm for tracheal intubation: Daily practice is the key to success in emergencies—an analysis of 13,248 intubations. Anesth Analg 2001; 92: 517–22.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Rose DK, Cohen MM. The airway: problems and predictions in 18,500 patients. Can J Anaesth 1994; 41: 372–83.[Web of Science][Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JRSMHome page
V. Adhiyaman, S. Adhiyaman, and R. Sundaram
The Lazarus phenomenon
J R Soc Med, December 1, 2007; 100(12): 552 - 557.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Henderson, J. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Henderson, J. J.


Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2001 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press