Safe Intubation in Cervical Spine Injury

La, Doolan; Jf, O'Brien

doi:10.1177/0310057x8501300313

Cited by 31 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although there have been a number of comprehensive reviews on the subject, the best method of achieving intubation remains controversial [I-61. There are two main schools of thought: those that recommend awake blind nasal intubation [7], and those that intubate the trachea orally after induction of anaesthesia and neuromuscular blockade [8,9]. During oral intubation it is important to immobilise the neck in the neutral position using manual in-line stabilisation [ 101 and, since the stomach is unlikely to be empty, cricoid pressure will be required as part of a rapid sequence induction technique.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Orotracheal intubation in patients with potential cervical spine injuries

1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe conditions for emergency tracheal intubation of patients with cervical spine injury were simulated in 157 patients during induction of anaesthesia for routine surgery. The view of the larynx obtained during laryngoscopy with the head in the optimum intubating position was compared with that obtained when manual in-line stabilisation of the cervical spine and cricoid pressure were used. During laryngoscopy with cervical stabilisation, the view of the larynx was reduced in 45% of patients, and in 22% of patients nothing was visible beyond the epiglottis. To assess the ease of intubation with the neck stabilised and with cricoid pressure applied, patients were randomised to either direct visual intubation (n = 79), or intubation aided by a gum elastic bougie (n = 78). The median time taken for visual intubation was 20 s. but in six patients intubation took over 45 s. In addition.jve patients in this group could not be directly intubated. Using the gum elastic bougie all patients, including the failures from the visual group, were intubated within 45 s (median 25 s). We recommend the gum elastic bougie as an aid to intubating the patient with suspected cervical spine injury, particularly when the glottis is not immediately visible.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Orotracheal intubation in patients with potential cervical spine injuries

1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Literature critique and analysis suggest that GERD has a causative role in subglottic stenosis, recurrent croup, chronic cough, and apnoea, and is also a significant cofactor in laryngomalacia, true vocal cord nodules, and recurrent choanal stenosis. Literature also supports that GERD is an important inflammatory cofactor in chronic sinusitis, otitis, and bronchitis and may result from chronic illness in older patients 19,20,47 .…”

Section: Miscellaneousmentioning

confidence: 91%

Pathologic paediatric conditions associated with a compromised airway

Baker

Parico

2010

Int J Paed Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful management of children and adolescents with a compromised airway begins with identification of the problem through a detailed medical history and physical examination. Due to the likely fragile nature of many of these patients, and possibility of concomitant medical conditions affecting airway management, dental treatment needs necessitating pharmacological management are best treated in a controlled setting such as the operating room, where a patent airway can be maintained.

show abstract

“…8 Despite the fact that intubation with MILS is the recommendation of the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma, 9 it has not been established that MILS reduces overall motion of an unstable cervical segment during intubation. The use of MILS is supported by several moderate-sized clinical series 8,10,11 but is physically awkward to perform, can result in a poorer view of the tracheal opening during intubation, 12 and increases the time required for intubation. 13 The use of the gum elastic bougie in conjunction with MILS has been postulated to decrease cervical motion during intubation with MILS, 14 but this has not been tested by direct assessment of cervical motion in either normal or unstable spines.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%