头颈部手术插管困难和甲状腺高度简化预测评分的有效性:一项观察性研究

Onur Selvi , Seda Tugce Kahraman , Serkan Tulgar , Ozgur Senturk , Talat Ercan Serifsoy , David Thomas , Ayse Surhan Cinar , Zeliha Ozer
{"title":"头颈部手术插管困难和甲状腺高度简化预测评分的有效性:一项观察性研究","authors":"Onur Selvi ,&nbsp;Seda Tugce Kahraman ,&nbsp;Serkan Tulgar ,&nbsp;Ozgur Senturk ,&nbsp;Talat Ercan Serifsoy ,&nbsp;David Thomas ,&nbsp;Ayse Surhan Cinar ,&nbsp;Zeliha Ozer","doi":"10.1016/j.bjan.2020.06.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and objectives</h3><p>In this study, we aimed to investigate the predictive value of different airway assessment tools, including parts of the Simplified Predictive Intubation Difficulty Score (SPIDS), the SPIDS itself and the Thyromental Height Test (TMHT), in intubations defined as difficult by the Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) in a group of patients who have head and neck pathologies.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>One hundred fifty‐three patients who underwent head and neck surgeries were included in the study. The Modified Mallampati Test (MMT) result, Thyromental Distance (TMD), Ratio of the Height/Thyromental Distance (RHTMD), TMHT, maximum range of head and neck motion, and mouth opening were measured. The SPIDSs were calculated, and the IDSs were determined.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 25.4% of the patients had difficult intubations. SPIDS scores &gt; 10 had 86.27% sensitivity, 71.57% specificity and 91.2% Negative Predictive Value (NPV). The results of the Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) analysis for the airway screening tests and SPIDS revealed that the SPIDS had the highest area under the curve; however, it was statistically similar to other tests, except for the MMT.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The current study demonstrates the practical use of the SPIDS in predicting intubation difficulty in patients with head and neck pathologies. The performance of the SPIDS in predicting airway difficulty was found to be as efficient as those of the other tests evaluated in this study. The SPIDS may be considered a comprehensive, detailed tool for predicting airway difficulty.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21261,"journal":{"name":"Revista brasileira de anestesiologia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bjan.2020.06.005","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Eficácia do escore simplificado preditivo de dificuldade de intubação e da altura tiromentoniana em cirurgias de cabeça e pescoço: estudo observacional\",\"authors\":\"Onur Selvi ,&nbsp;Seda Tugce Kahraman ,&nbsp;Serkan Tulgar ,&nbsp;Ozgur Senturk ,&nbsp;Talat Ercan Serifsoy ,&nbsp;David Thomas ,&nbsp;Ayse Surhan Cinar ,&nbsp;Zeliha Ozer\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bjan.2020.06.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and objectives</h3><p>In this study, we aimed to investigate the predictive value of different airway assessment tools, including parts of the Simplified Predictive Intubation Difficulty Score (SPIDS), the SPIDS itself and the Thyromental Height Test (TMHT), in intubations defined as difficult by the Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) in a group of patients who have head and neck pathologies.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>One hundred fifty‐three patients who underwent head and neck surgeries were included in the study. The Modified Mallampati Test (MMT) result, Thyromental Distance (TMD), Ratio of the Height/Thyromental Distance (RHTMD), TMHT, maximum range of head and neck motion, and mouth opening were measured. The SPIDSs were calculated, and the IDSs were determined.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 25.4% of the patients had difficult intubations. SPIDS scores &gt; 10 had 86.27% sensitivity, 71.57% specificity and 91.2% Negative Predictive Value (NPV). The results of the Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) analysis for the airway screening tests and SPIDS revealed that the SPIDS had the highest area under the curve; however, it was statistically similar to other tests, except for the MMT.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The current study demonstrates the practical use of the SPIDS in predicting intubation difficulty in patients with head and neck pathologies. The performance of the SPIDS in predicting airway difficulty was found to be as efficient as those of the other tests evaluated in this study. The SPIDS may be considered a comprehensive, detailed tool for predicting airway difficulty.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21261,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista brasileira de anestesiologia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bjan.2020.06.005\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista brasileira de anestesiologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034709420304293\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista brasileira de anestesiologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034709420304293","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景与目的在本研究中,我们旨在探讨不同气道评估工具,包括简化预测插管困难评分(SPIDS)的部分内容、SPIDS本身和甲状腺高度测试(TMHT),在一组有头颈部病变的患者中,由插管困难评分(IDS)定义为困难的插管中的预测价值。方法153例接受头颈部手术的患者纳入研究。测量改良Mallampati Test (MMT)结果、甲状腺距离(TMD)、身高/甲状腺距离比(RHTMD)、TMHT、最大头颈部运动范围、开口。计算了SPIDSs,并确定了ids。结果25.4%的患者出现插管困难。SPIDS评分>10例敏感性86.27%,特异性71.57%,阴性预测值(NPV) 91.2%。气道筛选试验和SPIDS的受试者工作曲线(ROC)分析结果显示,SPIDS的曲线下面积最大;然而,它在统计上与其他测试相似,除了MMT。结论本研究表明SPIDS在预测头颈部病变患者插管困难方面具有实际应用价值。SPIDS在预测气道困难方面的表现与本研究中评估的其他测试一样有效。SPIDS可以被认为是预测气道困难的全面、详细的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Eficácia do escore simplificado preditivo de dificuldade de intubação e da altura tiromentoniana em cirurgias de cabeça e pescoço: estudo observacional

Background and objectives

In this study, we aimed to investigate the predictive value of different airway assessment tools, including parts of the Simplified Predictive Intubation Difficulty Score (SPIDS), the SPIDS itself and the Thyromental Height Test (TMHT), in intubations defined as difficult by the Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) in a group of patients who have head and neck pathologies.

Methods

One hundred fifty‐three patients who underwent head and neck surgeries were included in the study. The Modified Mallampati Test (MMT) result, Thyromental Distance (TMD), Ratio of the Height/Thyromental Distance (RHTMD), TMHT, maximum range of head and neck motion, and mouth opening were measured. The SPIDSs were calculated, and the IDSs were determined.

Results

A total of 25.4% of the patients had difficult intubations. SPIDS scores > 10 had 86.27% sensitivity, 71.57% specificity and 91.2% Negative Predictive Value (NPV). The results of the Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) analysis for the airway screening tests and SPIDS revealed that the SPIDS had the highest area under the curve; however, it was statistically similar to other tests, except for the MMT.

Conclusions

The current study demonstrates the practical use of the SPIDS in predicting intubation difficulty in patients with head and neck pathologies. The performance of the SPIDS in predicting airway difficulty was found to be as efficient as those of the other tests evaluated in this study. The SPIDS may be considered a comprehensive, detailed tool for predicting airway difficulty.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
21 weeks
期刊介绍: The Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology is the official journal of the Brazilian Anesthesiology Society. It publishes articles classified into the following categories: -Scientific articles (clinical or experimental trials)- Clinical information (case reports)- Reviews- Letters to the Editor- Editorials. The journal focuses primarily on clinical trials, with scope on clinical practice, aiming at providing applied tools to the anesthesiologist and critical care physician. The Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology accepts articles exclusively forwarded to it. Articles already published in other journals are not accepted. All articles proposed for publication are previously submitted to the analysis of two or more members of the Editorial Board or other specialized consultants.
期刊最新文献
Atualização sobre reações de hipersensibilidade perioperatória: documento conjunto da Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA) e Associação Brasileira de Alergia e Imunologia (ASBAI) – Parte II: etiologia e diagnóstico Propofol‐cetamina versus dexmedetomidina‐cetamina para sedação durante endoscopia digestiva alta em pacientes pediátricos: estudo clínico randomizado Comparação entre morfina subaracnoidea e bloqueio do nervo femoral para analgesia após reconstrução ligamentar de joelho: estudo clínico randomizado Sequência de segurança de intubação: o algoritmo 10 “Ps” e ferramenta cognitiva para manuseio de vias aéreas em pacientes com COVID‐19 Dexametasona perineural em bloqueio de plexo braquial interescalênico com levobupivacaína guiado por ultrassonografia para artroscopia de ombro em regime ambulatorial: ensaio clínico controlado e randomizado
×
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