Comparison of real-time ultrasound with capnography to confirm endotracheal tube position in patients in critical care unit—A cross-sectional study

A. Kuppusamy, Gunaseelan Mirunalini, M. Koka, B. Ramamurthy
{"title":"Comparison of real-time ultrasound with capnography to confirm endotracheal tube position in patients in critical care unit—A cross-sectional study","authors":"A. Kuppusamy, Gunaseelan Mirunalini, M. Koka, B. Ramamurthy","doi":"10.4103/bjoa.bjoa_171_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Confirmation of the position of the endotracheal tube is a crucial step in the management of critically ill patients. Confirmation by capnography is the gold standard but it is practically impossible in all situations. Ultrasound (USG) can be used as an effective alternative to confirm the endotracheal tube (ETT) position. We aimed to determine the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of real-time USG with capnography to determine the correct placement of the ETT. Patients and Methods: The study population consisted of a nonselected series of 65 consecutive patients aged above 18 years who required endotracheal intubation in the critical care unit. Outcomes measured were confirmation of ETT by USG and capnography and time taken to confirm ETT position by USG and capnography, ruling out endobronchial placement of the ETT. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of real-time USG of the upper airway to detect the ETT position were 98.36% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91.20%–99.96%), 100% (95% CI: 39.76%–100%), 100%, 80% (95% CI: 36.41%–96.54%), and 98.46% (95% CI: 91.72%–99.96%), respectively. The mean time taken to detect the position of ETT by capnography (T2) was 15.91 ± 3.14 s, whereas that by real-time upper airway ultrasonogram (T1) was 11.85 ± 2.32 s, and the difference was statistically significant. Conclusion: Real-time tracheal USG is an alternative method to confirm the ETT position, which is not only sensitive and accurate but also faster than capnography.","PeriodicalId":8691,"journal":{"name":"Bali Journal of Anesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bali Journal of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/bjoa.bjoa_171_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Confirmation of the position of the endotracheal tube is a crucial step in the management of critically ill patients. Confirmation by capnography is the gold standard but it is practically impossible in all situations. Ultrasound (USG) can be used as an effective alternative to confirm the endotracheal tube (ETT) position. We aimed to determine the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of real-time USG with capnography to determine the correct placement of the ETT. Patients and Methods: The study population consisted of a nonselected series of 65 consecutive patients aged above 18 years who required endotracheal intubation in the critical care unit. Outcomes measured were confirmation of ETT by USG and capnography and time taken to confirm ETT position by USG and capnography, ruling out endobronchial placement of the ETT. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of real-time USG of the upper airway to detect the ETT position were 98.36% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91.20%–99.96%), 100% (95% CI: 39.76%–100%), 100%, 80% (95% CI: 36.41%–96.54%), and 98.46% (95% CI: 91.72%–99.96%), respectively. The mean time taken to detect the position of ETT by capnography (T2) was 15.91 ± 3.14 s, whereas that by real-time upper airway ultrasonogram (T1) was 11.85 ± 2.32 s, and the difference was statistically significant. Conclusion: Real-time tracheal USG is an alternative method to confirm the ETT position, which is not only sensitive and accurate but also faster than capnography.
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
实时超声与导管造影在重症监护病房患者气管插管位置确认中的比较——横断面研究
背景:气管插管位置的确定是危重病人管理的关键步骤。造影确认是金标准,但实际上在所有情况下都是不可能的。超声(USG)可以作为一种有效的替代方法来确定气管内管(ETT)的位置。我们的目的是确定实时超声心动图与毛细管造影的敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值以及准确性,以确定ETT的正确放置。患者和方法:研究人群包括65名年龄在18岁以上、在重症监护室需要气管插管的连续患者。测量的结果是USG和造影确认ETT, USG和造影确认ETT位置所需的时间,排除ETT在支气管内放置的可能性。结果:实时上呼吸道USG检测ETT位置的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、准确性分别为98.36%(95%可信区间[CI]: 91.20% ~ 99.96%)、100% (95% CI: 39.76% ~ 100%)、100%、80% (95% CI: 36.41% ~ 96.54%)、98.46% (95% CI: 91.72% ~ 99.96%)。导管造影(T2)检测ETT位置的平均时间为15.91±3.14 s,实时上气道超声(T1)检测ETT位置的平均时间为11.85±2.32 s,差异有统计学意义。结论:实时气管超声心动图是确定气管插管位置的一种替代方法,不仅灵敏、准确,而且比超声心动图更快。
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
Bali Journal of Anesthesiology
Bali Journal of Anesthesiology Nursing-Emergency Nursing
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Selective Critically ill patients with tracheostomy are eligible for direct from intensive care unit sent home: Case series Comment on: Effects of different anesthetic techniques on neutrophil lymphocyte ratio and monocyte lymphocyte ratio in patients undergoing major non-cardiac surgery: A prospective, single-blind, randomized study Low procalcitonin clearance correlates with mortality treated with culture-matched antibiotics in intensive care unit: A retrospective, observational study Phenylephrine, ondansetron, or combination of both for prevention of intraoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing lower segment cesarean section: A prospective, double-blind randomized control trial Artificial intelligence in anesthesia and critical care (part 1): Current perspective in critical care setting
×
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