Laryngeal Ultrasonography and Percent Leak Volume in Predicting Post-Extubation Stridor in The Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Patients

{"title":"Laryngeal Ultrasonography and Percent Leak Volume in Predicting Post-Extubation Stridor in The Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Patients","authors":"","doi":"10.35755/jmedassocthai.2023.04.13839","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Endotracheal tube intubation can be associated with laryngeal edema, which may present as post-extubation stridor (PES). PES may prolong length of stay in pediatric intensive care unit, particularly if reintubation was necessary.\n\nObjective: To evaluate the efficacy of laryngeal ultrasonography and percent leak volume (PLV) in predicting PES in pediatric patients.\n\nMaterials and Methods: A prospective study of 43 pediatric patients admitted to pediatric intensive care unit was conducted. Laryngeal ultrasonography was performed to measure air column width (ACW) within 24 hours after intubation. Within four hours before extubation, laryngeal ultrasonography was repeated. Air column width ratio (ACWR) was calculated by ACW before extubation divided by ACW after intubation. PLV was calculated by the difference between inspiratory and expiratory tidal volume divided by inspiratory tidal volume. Both of ACWR and PLV were analyzed to determine the optimal cut-off value for predicting PES.\n\nResults: Twenty-two patients (51%), developed PES. Receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC) analysis showed that ACWR at cut-off point ≤0.94 had a sensitivity of 72.7%, specificity of 61.9%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 66.7%, and accuracy of 67.4% in predicting PES. A cut-off point of PLV of less than 9.74% had 59.1% sensitivity, 57.1% specificity, 59.1% PPV, and 58.1% accuracy in predicting PES. ACWR and PLV had an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.722 (p=0.013, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.87) and 0.602 (p=0.253, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.77), respectively.\n\nConclusion: ACWR measured by laryngeal ultrasonography of 0.94 or less may be helpful in predicting PES. ACWR is more accurate than PLV in predicting PES.\n\nKeywords: Laryngeal ultrasonography; Percent leak volume; Post-extubation stridor","PeriodicalId":17486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35755/jmedassocthai.2023.04.13839","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Endotracheal tube intubation can be associated with laryngeal edema, which may present as post-extubation stridor (PES). PES may prolong length of stay in pediatric intensive care unit, particularly if reintubation was necessary. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of laryngeal ultrasonography and percent leak volume (PLV) in predicting PES in pediatric patients. Materials and Methods: A prospective study of 43 pediatric patients admitted to pediatric intensive care unit was conducted. Laryngeal ultrasonography was performed to measure air column width (ACW) within 24 hours after intubation. Within four hours before extubation, laryngeal ultrasonography was repeated. Air column width ratio (ACWR) was calculated by ACW before extubation divided by ACW after intubation. PLV was calculated by the difference between inspiratory and expiratory tidal volume divided by inspiratory tidal volume. Both of ACWR and PLV were analyzed to determine the optimal cut-off value for predicting PES. Results: Twenty-two patients (51%), developed PES. Receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC) analysis showed that ACWR at cut-off point ≤0.94 had a sensitivity of 72.7%, specificity of 61.9%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 66.7%, and accuracy of 67.4% in predicting PES. A cut-off point of PLV of less than 9.74% had 59.1% sensitivity, 57.1% specificity, 59.1% PPV, and 58.1% accuracy in predicting PES. ACWR and PLV had an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.722 (p=0.013, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.87) and 0.602 (p=0.253, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.77), respectively. Conclusion: ACWR measured by laryngeal ultrasonography of 0.94 or less may be helpful in predicting PES. ACWR is more accurate than PLV in predicting PES. Keywords: Laryngeal ultrasonography; Percent leak volume; Post-extubation stridor
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
喉超音波及喉漏率预测小儿加护病房病人拔管后喘鸣
背景:气管插管可伴有喉部水肿,其表现为拔管后喘鸣(PES)。PES可能会延长儿童重症监护病房的住院时间,特别是如果需要重新插管。目的:探讨喉超声及喉漏率(PLV)对小儿PES的预测价值。材料与方法:对43例儿科重症监护患者进行前瞻性研究。插管后24小时内进行喉超声检查,测量气管气柱宽度(ACW)。拔管前4小时复查喉部超声检查。气柱宽度比(ACWR)用拔管前的ACW除以插管后的ACW计算。PLV由吸气和呼气潮气量之差除以吸气潮气量计算。对ACWR和PLV进行分析,确定预测PES的最佳临界值。结果:22例(51%)发生PES。受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)分析显示,ACWR在截断点≤0.94时预测PES的敏感性为72.7%,特异性为61.9%,阳性预测值(PPV)为66.7%,准确率为67.4%。当PLV小于9.74%时,预测PES的敏感性为59.1%,特异性为57.1%,PPV为59.1%,准确度为58.1%。ACWR和PLV的ROC曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.722 (p=0.013, 95% CI 0.56 ~ 0.87)和0.602 (p=0.253, 95% CI 0.43 ~ 0.77)。结论:喉超声测得的ACWR值小于等于0.94有助于预测PES。ACWR对PES的预测比PLV更准确。关键词:喉超声;泄漏体积百分比;拔喘鸣
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
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis between Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy (PELD) and Conventional Lumbar Discectomy for Herniated Nucleus Pulposus (HNP) Behavioral Risk Score for Predicting Well-Controlled HbA1c Level in Diabetes Type 2 Patients The Choice of Anesthesia after First Failed Spinal Block and Its Impact on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Cesarean Delivery: A Cross-Sectional Study Efficacy of Levetiracetam versus Phenytoin in Neonatal Seizure in Rural Area of Thailand Spontaneous Sternal Fracture in Multiple Myeloma: 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