Endobronchial Blocker Placement for Lung Isolation in Children: A Simple Head Turn Technique

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. e01390
Author(s):  
Dinesh K. Choudhry ◽  
B. Randall Brenn ◽  
Gregory M. DiSilvio
2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 454-456
Author(s):  
Anthony M.-H. Ho ◽  
Innes Y. P. Wan ◽  
Randolph H. L. Wong ◽  
Calvin S. H. Ng ◽  
Siu K. Ng

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (6) ◽  
pp. 1528-1530 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Amar ◽  
Dawn P. Desiderio ◽  
Manjit S. Bains ◽  
Roger S. Wilson

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (12) ◽  
pp. 1249-1250
Author(s):  
R. Raviraj ◽  
Amar Nandhakumar ◽  
Grace Korula ◽  
Joyce N. James

Medicine ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 95 (19) ◽  
pp. e3687 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peng Liang ◽  
Juan Ni ◽  
Cheng Zhou ◽  
Hai Yu ◽  
Bin Liu

Author(s):  
PA Sahana ◽  
Pooja Rao ◽  
Gururaj Tantry ◽  
Thrivikrama Padur Tantry

One-Lung Ventilation (OLV) is achieved in thoracic surgeries to facilitate collapse of one lung for better surgical visualisation. Double-lumen tubes and bronchial blockers are two commonly used devices for OLV. Patients with ‘difficult airway’ pose significant challenges for insertion of Double Lumen Endotracheal Tube (DLT). Dual malignancy such as carcinoma of lung and head and neck is extremely rare to present with. Patients presenting with restricted mouth opening due to previous surgeries and requiring lung isolation techniques may pose significant challenges to anaesthesiologist. The difficult airway scenario may arise in such patients owing to their previous surgery to the tongue, larynx, neck, mandible or previous radiation. The present case was of 47-year-old of lung isolation achieved in a patient with restricted mouth opening with an orotracheal tube, bougie, endobronchial blocker and a flexible Fibre Optic Bronchoscope (FOB). Left upper lobectomy was successfully performed after passing endobronchial blocker through a conventional orotracheal tube under the guidance of FOB.


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.


Anaesthesia ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Vanner

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document