Airway Management During Anesthesia for Lung Transplantation: Double-Lumen Tube or Endobronchial Blocker?

Author(s):  
Manoj H. Iyer ◽  
Nicolas Kumar ◽  
Nasir Hussain ◽  
Michael Essandoh ◽  
Julia Kumar ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome Defosse ◽  
Mark Schieren ◽  
Torsten Loop ◽  
Vera von Dossow ◽  
Frank Wappler ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The scientific working group for “Anaesthesia in thoracic surgery” of the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI) has performed an online survey to assess the current standards of care and structural properties of anaesthesia workstations in thoracic surgery. Methods All members of the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) were invited to participate in the study. Results Thoracic anaesthesia was most commonly performed by specialists/board-certified anaesthetists and/or senior/attending physicians. Across Europe, the double lumen tube (DLT) was most commonly chosen as the primary device for lung separation (461/ 97.3%). Bronchial blockers were chosen less frequently (9/ 1.9%). Throughout Europe, bronchoscopy was not consistently used to confirm correct double lumen tube positioning. Respondents from Eastern Europe (32/ 57.1%) frequently stated that there were not enough bronchoscopes available for every intrathoracic operation. A specific algorithm for difficult airway management in thoracic anaesthesia was available to only 18.6% (n = 88) of the respondents. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is the most commonly used form of regional analgesia for thoracic surgery in Europe. Ultrasonography was widely available 93,8% (n = 412) throughout Europe and was predominantly used for central line placement and lung diagnostics. Conclusions While certain „gold standards “are widely met, there are also aspects of care requiring substantial improvement in thoracic anaesthesia throughout Europe. Our data suggest that algorithms and standard operating procedures for difficult airway management in thoracic anaesthesia need to be established. A European recommendation for the basic requirements of an anaesthesia workstation for thoracic anaesthesia is expedient and desirable, to improve structural quality and patient safety.


2006 ◽  
Vol 105 (3) ◽  
pp. 471-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heike Knoll ◽  
Stephan Ziegeler ◽  
Jan-Uwe Schreiber ◽  
Heiko Buchinger ◽  
Patric Bialas ◽  
...  

Background Vocal cord injuries, postoperative hoarseness, and sore throat are common complications after general anesthesia. One-lung ventilation can be achieved via two techniques: double-lumen endotracheal tube or endobronchial blocker such as the Arndt blocker. The current study was designed to assess the impact of these techniques for one-lung ventilation on the incidence and severity of postoperative hoarseness, vocal cord lesions, and sore throat. Methods In this prospective trial, 60 patients were randomly assigned to two groups. One-lung ventilation was achieved with either an endobronchial blocker (blocker group) or a double-lumen-tube (double-lumen group). Postoperative hoarseness and sore throat were assessed at 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery. Bronchial injuries and vocal cord lesions were examined by bronchoscopy immediately after surgery. Results In 56 included patients, postoperative hoarseness occurred significantly more frequently in the double-lumen group compared with the blocker group: 44% versus 17%, respectively (P = 0.046). Similar findings were observed for vocal cord lesions: 44% versus 17%, respectively (P = 0.046). The incidence of bronchial injuries was comparable between groups (P = 0.540). Cumulative number of days with hoarseness and sore throat were significantly increased in the double-lumen group compared with the blocker group (P < 0.01). No major complications such as bronchial ruptures were observed. Conclusions Clinicians should be aware of an increased incidence of minor airway injuries that may impair patient satisfaction when using a double-lumen tube instead of an endobronchial blocker for one-lung ventilation.


1997 ◽  
Vol 84 (4) ◽  
pp. 940 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Habibi ◽  
Sean Mackey ◽  
Jay B. Brodsky

2008 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 441-446
Author(s):  
T. Zhong ◽  
W. Wang ◽  
J. Chen ◽  
L. Ran ◽  
D. A. Story

Double-lumen endotracheal tubes and bronchial blockers allow lung isolation for one-lung ventilation. Few studies, however, directly compare these devices. Further, a new endobronchial blocker (Coopdech) is available in some countries. Our primary hypothesis was that bronchial blockers would be associated with less sore throat or hoarse voice than double-lumen tubes. Secondary outcomes were successful one-lung ventilation and surgical access. In this prospective trial, 120 Chinese patients undergoing elective surgery were randomly assigned to one of four groups of 30 patients: Coopdech blocker, Arndt blocker, Univent tube or double-lumen tube. Postoperative sore throat and hoarse voice were assessed in the recovery room and 24 hours after surgery. The incidence and severity of sore throat or hoarse voice was less in the blocker groups than double-lumen tube group: Coopdech 13%, Arndt 20%, Univent 30% and double-lumen tube 60%, P <0.001. The blocker groups did not significantly differ, P=0.28. Compared to the double-lumen tubes the bronchial blockers took about two minutes less to position but five minutes longer for lung deflation. Surgical exposure was uniformly good across the four groups. We conclude that clinical use of the Coopdech endobronchial blocker is similar to the Arndt and Univent blockers and that all three are associated with less sore throat or hoarse voice than double-lumen tubes.


1997 ◽  
Vol 84 (4) ◽  
pp. 940
Author(s):  
Ali Habibi ◽  
Sean Mackey ◽  
Jay B. Brodsky

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document