ABSTRACT
Abstract Female, 85 y.o., weighting 60 kg, multiple trauma patient. After an initial laparotomy, an emergent thoracotomy was performed using a bronchial blocker for lung isolation (initial active suction was applied). During surgery, bronchial cuff was deflated, causing a self-limited tracheal blood flooding. A second lung isolation was attempted but it was not as effective as initially. Probably, a lung collapse with the same bronchial blocker was impaired in the second attempt because of the obstruction of bronchial blocker lumen by intraoperative endobronchial hemorrhage. Bronchial blocker active suction may contribute to obtain or accelerate lung collapse, particularly in patients that do not tolerate ventilator disconnection technique or lung surgical compression. The use of bronchial blockers technology was a valuable alternative to double lumen tubes in this case of emergent thoracotomy in the context of a patient having thoracic, abdominal trauma, severe laceration of tongue and apophysis odontoid fracture associated to massive hemorrhage, despite several pitfalls that could compromise its use. The authors intend to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of bronchial blockers comparing to double-lumen tubes for lung isolation, and the risks of our approach, in this complex multitrauma case.
Resumo Paciente do sexo feminino, 85 anos, 60 kg, com trauma múltiplo. Após uma laparotomia inicial, uma toracotomia de emergência foi feita com um bloqueador brônquico para isolamento pulmonar (sucção inicial ativa foi aplicada). Durante a cirurgia, o balonete brônquico foi desinflado, causou um derrame hemorrágico traqueal autolimitado. Reisolamento foi tentado, mas não foi tão eficaz como inicialmente. Provavelmente, o colapso do pulmão com o mesmo bloqueador brônquico foi prejudicado na segunda tentativa devido à obstrução do lúmen do bloqueador brônquico pela hemorragia endobrônquica intraoperatória. A sucção ativa do bloqueador brônquico pode contribuir para obter ou acelerar o colapso pulmonar, particularmente em pacientes que não toleram a técnica de desconexão do ventilador ou a compressão cirúrgica pulmonar. O uso da tecnologia de bloqueadores brônquicos foi uma opção valiosa para os tubos de duplo lúmen neste caso de toracotomia de emergência em paciente com trauma torácico e abdominal, laceração grave da língua e fratura da apófise odontoide associados a hemorragia maciça, apesar de vários riscos que poderiam comprometer seu uso. Os autores pretendem discutir as vantagens e desvantagens dos bloqueadores brônquicos em comparação com os tubos de duplo lúmen para isolamento pulmonar e quais foram os riscos de nossa abordagem neste complexo caso de múltiplo trauma.
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Aged, 80 and over , Thoracic Injuries , Thoracotomy/instrumentation , One-Lung Ventilation/methods , Respiratory Protective DevicesABSTRACT
Background: Confirmation of placement of Double lumen endobronchial tubes (DLETT) and bronchial blockers (BBs) with the pediatric fiberoptic bronchoscope (FOB) is the most preferred practice worldwide. Most centers possess standard adult FOBs, some, particularly in developing countries might not have access to the pediatric‑sized devices. We have evaluated the role of preintubation airway assessment using the former, measuring the distance from the incisors to the carina and from carina to the left and right upper lobe bronchus in deciding the depth of insertion of the lung isolation device. Methods: The study was a randomized, controlled, double‑blind trial consisting of 84 patients (all >18 years) undergoing thoracic surgery over a 12‑month period. In the study group (n = 38), measurements obtained during FOB with the adult bronchoscope decided the depth of insertion of the lung isolation device. In the control group (n = 46), DLETTs and BBs were placed blindly followed by clinical confirmation by auscultation. Selection of the type and size of the lung isolation device was at the discretion of the anesthesiologist conducting the case. In all cases, pediatric FOB was used to confirm accurate placement of devices. Results: Of 84 patients (DLETT used in 76 patients; BB used in 8 patients), preintubation airway measurements significantly improved the success rate of optimal placement of lung isolation device from 25% (11/44) to 50% (18/36) (P = 0.04). Our incidence of failed device placement at initial insertion was 4.7% (4/84). Incidence of malposition was 10% (8/80) with 4 cases in each group. The incidence of suboptimal placement was lower in the study group at 38.9% (14/36) versus 65.9% (29/44). Conclusions: Preintubation airway measurements with the adult FOB reduces airway manipulations and improves the success rate of optimal placement of DLETT and BB.