Preclinical Trial of the Effectiveness of the Safety Nasogastric Tube to Detecting Tube Position Based on Tidal Volume and Pepsin Assay Results in the Gastrointestinal Tract of Macaca Fascicularis

Background: Generally, insertion of a nasogastric tube (NGT) does not use imaging guidance. This procedure has a risk of malposition to the lungs from 0.3–15%. The NGT verification only detects the position of the tube in the end of procedure. Misplacement of NGT into the respiratory tract can result in damage to the lungs. Safety nasogastric tube (SNGT) has been created to detect the position of the tube in real-time, simple, and inexpensive. This study aims to prove the effectiveness of the SNGT prototype in Macaca fascicularis. Result: The SNGT with an airbag size of 50% of tidal volume (SNGT 50% TV) had 100% sensitivity and specificity in detecting the position of the tube. While the SNGT with an airbag size of 100% of TV (SNGT 100% TV) has sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 87.5%. There was significant difference between the movement of airbag of SNGT 50% TV and SNGT 100% TV (p ≤ 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the accuracy of placement of 50% TV SNGT, 100% TV SNGT, and conventional NGT (p > 0.05). The pepsin enzyme has better sensitivity (100%) than pH paper (91.66%) in detecting the end position of tube. Conclusion: SNGT tube has high effectiveness in detecting the position of the tube inside of the respiratory and digestive tracts to prevent misplacement.

Comparative study of the reliability of ultrasound to confirm the position of endotracheal tube with cuff inflated with saline versus air

Aim: To compare the reliability of transtracheal ultrasound to confirm the endotracheal tube position with saline versus air inflated cuff. Methods: This was a prospective randomized cadaveric study. Four techniques were randomized: endotracheal tube in the trachea with air or saline inflated cuff, and endotracheal tube in the esophagus with air or saline inflated cuff. The investigator used the Mcgrath to randomly place the endotracheal tube in the trachea or in the esophagus with saline or air inflated cuff. During the first series of measurements, nine residents performed transtracheal ultrasound with linear transducer placed transversely at the suprasternal notch. They were recorded with a cut off fixed to 30 seconds, and a questionnaire was completed by the residents after each transtracheal ultrasound in order to report where the endotracheal tube is positioned according to them. The second series followed the same protocol and included three residents who had participated in the first series. The primary outcome was the success rate in determining the position of the endotracheal tube. Results: In the first series, the success rate was 46.5%. In the second series, the success rate was 72.9%. There was no significant difference between cuff inflated with saline and air (p = 1.00). The overall mean time required was 20.6 s (95% CI 13.0–28.2 s). Based on an empirical data set, transtracheal ultrasound had a sensitivity of 62.2%, specificity of 100%, positive predictive value of 100%, and negative predictive value of 26.08%. Conclusion: This investigation shows that regardless of the contents of the endotracheal tube cuff, the use of transtracheal ultrasound to confirm the position of endotracheal tube reports disappointing results.

Using Transfer Learning Method to Develop an Artificial Intelligence Assisted Triaging for Endotracheal Tube Position on Chest X-ray

Endotracheal tubes (ETTs) provide a vital connection between the ventilator and patient; however, improper placement can hinder ventilation efficiency or injure the patient. Chest X-ray (CXR) is the most common approach to confirming ETT placement; however, technicians require considerable expertise in the interpretation of CXRs, and formal reports are often delayed. In this study, we developed an artificial intelligence-based triage system to enable the automated assessment of ETT placement in CXRs. Three intensivists performed a review of 4293 CXRs obtained from 2568 ICU patients. The CXRs were labeled “CORRECT” or “INCORRECT” in accordance with ETT placement. A region of interest (ROI) was also cropped out, including the bilateral head of the clavicle, the carina, and the tip of the ETT. Transfer learning was used to train four pre-trained models (VGG16, INCEPTION_V3, RESNET, and DENSENET169) and two models developed in the current study (VGG16_Tensor Projection Layer and CNN_Tensor Projection Layer) with the aim of differentiating the placement of ETTs. Only VGG16 based on ROI images presented acceptable performance (AUROC = 92%, F1 score = 0.87). The results obtained in this study demonstrate the feasibility of using the transfer learning method in the development of AI models by which to assess the placement of ETTs in CXRs.

Unusual Nasogastric Tube Position Leading to Delay in Diagnosis of Tracheoesophageal Fistula

Aim: This case highlights the importance of high index of suspicion for early diagnosis and thorough clinical examination of a newborn with tracheoesophageal atresia and fistula. Case Report: We report a case of most common type of tracheoesophageal atresia with fistula where diagnosis was missed due to unusual gastric position of nasogastric tube. Nasogastric tube reached stomach in esophageal atresia with fistula, delaying the diagnosis and management of condition. After accidental removal of tube and failure to pass again raised suspicion and was confirmed with coiled tube in esophageal pouch in X-Ray chest. Baby shifted to surgical unit for treatment, fortunately baby recovered and discharged home after surgical correction. Conclusion: Tracheoesophageal atresia with fistula can present with atypical symptoms and unusual events, challenging the early diagnosis and treatment of common types of conditions. Other association like VACTERL should be looked for, in patients.

Comparison of the novel VieScope with conventional and video laryngoscope in a difficult airway scenario – a randomized, controlled simulation trial

Background Endotracheal intubation continues to be the gold standard for securing the airway in emergency situations. Difficult intubation is still a dreadful situation when securing the airway. Objective To compare VieScope with Glidescope and conventional Macintosh laryngoscopy (MAC) in a simulated difficult airway situation. Methods In this randomized controlled simulation trial, 35 anesthesiologists performed endotracheal intubation using VieScope, GlideScope and MAC in a randomized order on a certified airway manikin with difficult airway. Results For the primary endpoint of correct tube position, no statistical difference was found (p = 0.137). Time until intubation for GlideScope (27.5 ± 20.3 s) and MAC (20.8 ± 8.1 s) were shorter compared to the VieScope (36.3 ± 10.1 s). Time to first ventilation, GlideScope (39.3 ± 21.6 s) and MAC (31.9 ± 9.5 s) were also shorter compared to the VieScope (46.5 ± 12.4 s). There was no difference shown between handling time for VieScope (20.7 ± 7.0 s) and time until intubation with GlideScope or MAC. Participants stated a better Cormack & Lehane Score with VieScope, compared to direct laryngoscopy. Conclusion Rate of correct tracheal tube position was comparable between the three devices. Time to intubation and ventilation were shorter with MAC and Glidescope compared to VieScope. It did however show a comparable handling time to video laryngoscopy and MAC. It also did show a better visualization of the airway in the Cormack & Lehane Score compared to MAC. Trial registration The study was registered at the German Clinical Trials Register www.drks.de (Identifier: DRKS00024968) on March 31st 2021.