Evaluating the precision of ultrasound versus computed tomography-guided measurement of cricoid cartilage diameter for double-lumen tube selection in thoracic surgery: A randomised comparative study.

IF 2.9 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-14 DOI:10.4103/ija.ija_641_24
Roshni M Mathew, Shefali Gautam, Rajesh Raman, Anurag Rai, Vinod K Srivastava, Manish K Singh
{"title":"Evaluating the precision of ultrasound versus computed tomography-guided measurement of cricoid cartilage diameter for double-lumen tube selection in thoracic surgery: A randomised comparative study.","authors":"Roshni M Mathew, Shefali Gautam, Rajesh Raman, Anurag Rai, Vinod K Srivastava, Manish K Singh","doi":"10.4103/ija.ija_641_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Precise airway management is vital in thoracic surgeries to ensure patient safety and optimal outcomes. Choosing the correct double-lumen tube (DLT) size is challenging, as it typically relies on height, gender and subjective experience. This study investigates using ultrasonography (USG) and computed tomography (CT) to measure cricoid cartilage diameter for objective DLT sizing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a randomised study, 120 adult patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery were randomised to three groups: Group A (DLT size determined by USG), Group B (DLT size determined by CT) and Group C (DLT size determined by conventional methods based on height and gender). The primary outcome variable was the appropriateness of DLT size. Secondary outcome variables were the degree of lung collapse and sore throat. Student's <i>t</i>-test and ꭓ<sup>2</sup> test were used to analyse continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DLT sizing based on cricoid cartilage diameter improved the accuracy, with inappropriate sizes found in 25% in the conventional group, 5% in the USG group and 2.5% in the CT group (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Lung collapse was better in the USG (excellent in 92.5%) and CT (95%) groups compared to the conventional group (70%) (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Moderate sore throat was higher in the conventional group (37.5%) compared to the USG (5%) and CT groups (7.5%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study demonstrates that USG- and CT-guided measurements of cricoid cartilage diameter are reliable and effective methods for determining DLT size in thoracic surgery compared to conventional methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":13339,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11498253/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_641_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: Precise airway management is vital in thoracic surgeries to ensure patient safety and optimal outcomes. Choosing the correct double-lumen tube (DLT) size is challenging, as it typically relies on height, gender and subjective experience. This study investigates using ultrasonography (USG) and computed tomography (CT) to measure cricoid cartilage diameter for objective DLT sizing.

Methods: In a randomised study, 120 adult patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery were randomised to three groups: Group A (DLT size determined by USG), Group B (DLT size determined by CT) and Group C (DLT size determined by conventional methods based on height and gender). The primary outcome variable was the appropriateness of DLT size. Secondary outcome variables were the degree of lung collapse and sore throat. Student's t-test and ꭓ2 test were used to analyse continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively.

Results: DLT sizing based on cricoid cartilage diameter improved the accuracy, with inappropriate sizes found in 25% in the conventional group, 5% in the USG group and 2.5% in the CT group (P < 0.05). Lung collapse was better in the USG (excellent in 92.5%) and CT (95%) groups compared to the conventional group (70%) (P < 0.05). Moderate sore throat was higher in the conventional group (37.5%) compared to the USG (5%) and CT groups (7.5%).

Conclusion: The study demonstrates that USG- and CT-guided measurements of cricoid cartilage diameter are reliable and effective methods for determining DLT size in thoracic surgery compared to conventional methods.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估胸外科手术中双腔管选择时超声与计算机断层扫描引导测量环状软骨直径的精确性:随机对比研究。
背景和目的:在胸外科手术中,精确的气道管理对确保患者安全和最佳治疗效果至关重要。选择正确的双腔管(DLT)尺寸具有挑战性,因为它通常取决于身高、性别和主观经验。本研究调查了使用超声波(USG)和计算机断层扫描(CT)测量环状软骨直径以客观确定双腔管尺寸的方法:在一项随机研究中,120 名接受择期胸外科手术的成年患者被随机分为三组:A 组(通过 USG 确定 DLT 大小)、B 组(通过 CT 确定 DLT 大小)和 C 组(通过基于身高和性别的传统方法确定 DLT 大小)。主要结果变量是 DLT 大小是否合适。次要结果变量为肺塌陷程度和咽喉痛。学生 t 检验和ꭓ2 检验分别用于分析连续变量和二分变量:根据环状软骨直径确定 DLT 大小提高了准确性,传统组中发现尺寸不合适的比例为 25%,USG 组为 5%,CT 组为 2.5%(P < 0.05)。与传统组(70%)相比,USG 组(92.5% 为优秀)和 CT 组(95%)的肺塌陷情况更好(P < 0.05)。与 USG 组(5%)和 CT 组(7.5%)相比,传统组的中度咽喉痛发生率更高(37.5%):研究表明,与传统方法相比,USG 和 CT 引导下的环状软骨直径测量是确定胸外科 DLT 大小的可靠而有效的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
44.80%
发文量
210
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊最新文献
ABCs of anaesthesia private practice: Adapting, building and conquering. Anaesthetic management of a child with suspected Opitz-Kaveggia syndrome. Awake Seldinger technique-based tracheal intubation in near-total laryngeal obstruction. Bridging the pain gap after cancer surgery - Evaluating the feasibility of transitional pain service to prevent persistent postsurgical pain - A systematic review and meta-analysis. Challenges in central venous catheter placement due to thoracic venous anomaly in an infant - A case report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1