Which test best predicts difficult endotracheal intubation? A prospective cohort study.

Güray Alp, Müge Koşucu
{"title":"Which test best predicts difficult endotracheal intubation? A prospective cohort study.","authors":"Güray Alp,&nbsp;Müge Koşucu","doi":"10.14744/tjtes.2022.34460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is critical to identify patients whose intubation will be difficult to ensure that necessary precautions are taken. In this study, we aimed to show the power of almost all tests used to predict difficult endotracheal intubation (DEI), and to determine which test are more accurate for this purpose.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This observational study conducted between May 2015 and January 2016 at department of anesthesiology of a tertiary hospital in Turkey (n=501). A total of 25 parameters and 22 tests used for DEI were compared according to groups formed according to the Cormack-Lehane classification (gold standard).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age was 49.83±14.00 years, and 259 (51.70%) patients were males. We found difficult intubation frequency to be 7.58%. Mallampati classification, atlanto-occipital joint movement test (AOJMT), upper lip bite test, mandibulohyoid distance (MHD), maxillopharyngeal angle, height-to-thyromental distance ratio, and mask ventilation test were independently associated with difficult intubation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite comparing 22 tests, the results obtained in this study cannot definitively identify any single test that pre-dicts difficult intubation. Nonetheless, our results show that MHD (high sensitivity and negative predictive value) and AOJMT (high specificity and positive predictive value) are the most useful tests to predict difficult intubation.</p>","PeriodicalId":49398,"journal":{"name":"Ulusal Travma Ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi-Turkish Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery","volume":"29 4","pages":"477-485"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d1/83/TJTES-29-477.PMC10214888.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ulusal Travma Ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi-Turkish Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2022.34460","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: It is critical to identify patients whose intubation will be difficult to ensure that necessary precautions are taken. In this study, we aimed to show the power of almost all tests used to predict difficult endotracheal intubation (DEI), and to determine which test are more accurate for this purpose.

Methods: This observational study conducted between May 2015 and January 2016 at department of anesthesiology of a tertiary hospital in Turkey (n=501). A total of 25 parameters and 22 tests used for DEI were compared according to groups formed according to the Cormack-Lehane classification (gold standard).

Results: The mean age was 49.83±14.00 years, and 259 (51.70%) patients were males. We found difficult intubation frequency to be 7.58%. Mallampati classification, atlanto-occipital joint movement test (AOJMT), upper lip bite test, mandibulohyoid distance (MHD), maxillopharyngeal angle, height-to-thyromental distance ratio, and mask ventilation test were independently associated with difficult intubation.

Conclusion: Despite comparing 22 tests, the results obtained in this study cannot definitively identify any single test that pre-dicts difficult intubation. Nonetheless, our results show that MHD (high sensitivity and negative predictive value) and AOJMT (high specificity and positive predictive value) are the most useful tests to predict difficult intubation.

Abstract Image

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
哪个测试最能预测气管插管困难?一项前瞻性队列研究。
背景:识别插管困难的患者,确保采取必要的预防措施是至关重要的。在这项研究中,我们的目的是展示几乎所有用于预测气管插管困难(DEI)的测试的能力,并确定哪种测试更准确。方法:本观察性研究于2015年5月至2016年1月在土耳其某三级医院麻醉科进行(n=501)。根据Cormack-Lehane分类(金标准)分组,对DEI的25个参数和22个试验进行比较。结果:平均年龄49.83±14.00岁,男性259例(51.70%)。插管困难发生率为7.58%。Mallampati分型、寰枕关节运动试验(AOJMT)、上唇咬合试验、下颌舌骨距离(MHD)、颌咽角、身高与甲状腺距离比、面罩通气试验与插管困难独立相关。结论:尽管比较了22项测试,本研究获得的结果并不能明确地确定任何一项预测插管困难的测试。尽管如此,我们的研究结果表明MHD(高敏感性和阴性预测值)和AOJMT(高特异性和阳性预测值)是预测插管困难最有用的测试。
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
1.40
自引率
18.20%
发文量
82
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery (TJTES) is an official publication of the Turkish Association of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. It is a double-blind and peer-reviewed periodical that considers for publication clinical and experimental studies, case reports, technical contributions, and letters to the editor. Scope of the journal covers the trauma and emergency surgery. Each submission will be reviewed by at least two external, independent peer reviewers who are experts in their fields in order to ensure an unbiased evaluation process. The editorial board will invite an external and independent reviewer to manage the evaluation processes of manuscripts submitted by editors or by the editorial board members of the journal. The Editor in Chief is the final authority in the decision-making process for all submissions.
期刊最新文献
Selection for antimicrobial prophylaxis in emergency and elective transurethral procedures: Susceptibility pattern in Türkiye. The comparison of the suture materials on intestinal anastomotic healing: an experimental study. Research of Importance of Thiol, CRP and Lactate in Diagnosing Mesenteric Ischemia At An Early Stage: Animal Model. Trauma in pregnancy: An analysis of the adverse perinatal outcomes and the injury severity score. Is diagnostic laparoscopy necessary in the management of left thoracoabdominal stab wounds?
×
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