Preprocedural ultrasound assessment does not improve trainee performance of spinal anesthesia for obstetrical patients: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of additional information from preprocedure ultrasound examination to aid anesthesiology trainees performing spinal anesthesia for obstetric patients. DESIGN: Trainee residents were randomly allocated to landmark technique and anatomy demonstration via ultrasound examination or landmark technique only for spinal anesthetic placement. SETTING: Obstetric delivery suite. PATIENTS: Eighty healthy obstetric patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery. INTERVENTION: Ultrasound examination prior to spinal anesthetic placement. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the number of attempts for the spinal anesthetic. Secondary outcomes included placement duration; block height; and the incidence of need for staff intervention, paresthesia, and bloody tap. Subjective ease of placement was rated on a 100-mm visual analog scale. MAIN RESULTS: Baseline demographic data were similar between the patient groups. The median number of attempts with preprocedure ultrasound and landmark was 3 (interquartile range, 2-7). This was not significantly different from the number of attempts with landmark technique only of 3 (1-60) (P=.69). The median duration of spinal placement with ultrasound and landmark was 92 (51-140) seconds vs 75 (53-126) seconds with landmark only (P=.57). There was no statistical difference between the groups in spinal placement duration, need for staff intervention, paresthesia, bloody tap, lumbar interspace, or block height. There was no difference in subjective ease of spinal placement by the resident. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of junior anesthesia trainees performing obstetrical spinal anesthesia with preprocedure ultrasound and landmark technique or landmark technique only, no significant difference was observed in the number of attempts, duration of spinal placement, subjective ease of spinal placement, or any other measured secondary outcome.

Comparison of a single-use GlideScope Cobalt videolaryngoscope with a conventional GlideScope for orotracheal intubation.

BACKGROUND: This study was conceived to compare the single-use GlideScope Cobalt videolaryngoscope with the conventional GlideScope videolaryngoscope for orotracheal intubation, as judged by time to intubation (TTI) and ease of intubation. METHODS: One hundred patients with normal-appearing airways requiring orotracheal intubation for elective surgery were randomly allocated to have their tracheas intubated by a heterogeneous group of operators with the Cobalt GlideScope or the conventional GlideScope. TTI was assessed by a blinded observer. Operators were blinded until the start of laryngoscopy. A visual analogue scale (VAS) assessed the ease of intubation. The number of intubation attempts, number of failures, glottic grades, and fogging of the video screen were recorded. RESULTS: There was no difference between the median TTI of the GlideScope Cobalt and the conventional GlideScope (40.1 sec, interquartile range [IQR] 34.1, 51.3 vs 39 sec, IQR 32.6, 48.1, respectively; P = 0.75). The ease of intubation was similar between the two devices (median Cobalt VAS: 16 mm, IQR 10.8, 27.3, vs median conventional VAS: 12.5 mm, IQR 10, 20.5, respectively; P = 0.12). There were no significant differences between the two devices with respect to glottic exposure, intubation attempts, failures, or video screen fogging. CONCLUSIONS: The GlideScope Cobalt has similar performance characteristics compared with the conventional GlideScope videolaryngoscope when used for orotracheal intubation. The two devices can likely be used interchangeably. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00459797.).

A comparison of glidescope videolaryngoscopy to direct laryngoscopy for nasotracheal intubation.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we compared the effectiveness of direct laryngoscopy (DL) and the GlideScope videolaryngoscope (GVL) for nasotracheal intubation, as judged by the time to intubation (TTI-the primary outcome) and the ease of intubation. METHODS: Seventy patients requiring nasotracheal intubation for elective surgery were randomly allocated to intubation with the GVL or DL. TTI was assessed by a blinded observer. Operators were blinded until the start of laryngoscopy. A Visual Analog Scale assessed the ease of intubation. The number of intubation attempts, number of failures, glottic grades, amount of bleeding, usage of Magill forceps, and the severity of postoperative sore throat were recorded. RESULTS: The median TTI was 23.2 s faster with the GVL (43.5 s, interquartile range [IQR]: 39.8-67.3) than with DL (66.7 s, IQR: 53.8-89.9), P = 0.0023. Nasotracheal intubation was easier with the GVL than with DL (Visual Analog Scale 10 mm, IQR: 5.5-18, vs 20 mm, IQR: 10-32, P = 0.0041). The incidence of postoperative moderate or severe sore throat was significantly reduced in the GVL group (9% vs 34%, P = 0.018). Glottic exposure was significantly better with the GVL. Magill forceps were not used in the GVL group, but were used 49% of the time in the DL group, P < 0.0001. The incidence and severity of bleeding were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with DL, the GVL has superior performance characteristics when used for nasotracheal intubation and demonstrates an important reduction of postoperative sore throat. The GVL has a clear role in routine nasotracheal intubation.

The GlideScope-specific rigid stylet and standard malleable stylet are equally effective for GlideScope use.

PURPOSE: The GlideScope videolaryngoscope usually provides excellent glottic visualization, but directing an endotracheal tube (ETT) through the vocal cords can be challenging. The goal of the study was to compare the dedicated GlideScope-specific rigid stylet to the standard malleable stylet, assessed by time to intubation (TTI). METHODS: Eighty patients requiring orotracheal intubation for elective surgery were randomly allocated to either the GlideScope rigid stylet (GRS) or a standard malleable stylet to facilitate intubation using the GlideScope. Time to intubation was recorded by blinded assessors; operators were blinded until after laryngoscopy. The operator assessed the ease of intubation using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The number of intubation attempts, number of failures, glottic grades, and use of external laryngeal manipulation were documented. RESULTS: The median TTI was 42.7 sec (inter-quartile range (IQR) 38.9-56.7) for the GRS group compared to 39.9 sec (IQR 34.1-48.2) for the control group (P=0.07). The median VAS score for ease of intubation was 20 (IQR 12.0-33.0) for the GRS group compared to 18 (IQR 9.5-29.5) for the control group (P=0.21). There was no significant difference in TTI or VAS between stylets. The overall incidence of a Cormack-Lehane grade I or II glottic view was 98%. CONCLUSIONS: In a group of experienced operators using the GlideScope, the dedicated GRS and the standard malleable ETT stylet are equally effective in facilitating endotracheal intubation.

Effect of stylet angulation and endotracheal tube camber on time to intubation with the GlideScope.

PURPOSE: The GlideScope videolaryngoscope usually provides excellent glottic visualization, but directing an endotracheal tube (ETT) through the vocal cords is sometimes difficult. The goal of the study was to determine which of two ETT angles (60 degrees vs 90 degrees ) and cambers (forward vs reverse) was better, as determined by time to intubation (TTI). METHODS: Two hundred patients requiring orotracheal intubation for elective surgery were randomly allocated to one of four groups: A) 90 degrees angle, forward camber; B) 90 degrees angle, reverse camber; C) 60 degrees angle, forward camber; D) 60 degrees angle, reverse camber. Time to intubation was assessed by a blinded observer. Operators were blinded until the point of intubation. A visual analogue scale (VAS) assessed the ease of intubation. The number of intubation attempts, number of failures, glottic grades, and use of external laryngeal manipulation were recorded. RESULTS: The angle of the ETT had an impact on TTI but camber did not. The 90 degrees angle demonstrated a 13% faster TTI than the 60 degrees angle (47.1 +/- 21.2 sec vs 54.4 +/- 28.2 sec, P=0.042), and it resulted in easier intubation (VAS 16.4 +/- 14.2 mm vs 27.3 +/- 23.5 mm, P=0.0001). The overall incidence of a grade 1 or 2 Cormack-Lehane glottic view was 99%. CONCLUSIONS: In a heterogeneous group of operators and patients intubated with the GlideScope, a 90 degrees ETT angle provided the best result and should be the initial configuration. The camber of the ETT does not affect the time to intubation.

Brachial plexus anesthesia compared to general anesthesia when a block room is available.

PURPOSE: Regional anesthesia is often felt to be beneficial to patient care but detrimental to operating room (OR) efficiency. In this report we compare how a block room (BR) affects OR time (ORT) utilization for brachial plexus anesthesia (BPA) in a busy upper limb practice. We also compare how anesthetic technique, BPA or general anesthesia (GA), impacts on the time to recovery and discharge in patients having outpatient upper limb surgery. METHODS: With the Ethics Committee's approval, a prospective study using hospital databases was undertaken. All patients presenting for surgery on the upper limb between November 1999 and April 2000 were eligible for analysis. A comparison was made of the various time intervals that comprise a patient's hospital stay for either GA or BPA. Demographic data (ASA, age, outpatient status), and location of BPA were analyzed. RESULTS: Use of the BR for BPA significantly reduced the pre-procedure anesthesia ORT when compared to BPA done in the OR (11.4 vs 32.9 min, P < 0.05; GA pre-procedure time was 17.8 min). In the ambulatory patient, BPA alone reduced post procedure anesthesia ORT, postanesthetic care unit, surgical day care unit, and total hospital times when compared to those receiving GA. On average those receiving a BPA spent 1.5 hr less in hospital (P < 0.01). Additionally, fewer admissions (2.4 vs 5.4%) occurred in the BPA group. CONCLUSION: The use of a BR reduces the anesthesia ORT associated with BPA. Secondly, BPA improves the recovery time phase of outpatients undergoing surgery on the upper limb.

Epinephrine reduces the sedative side effects of epidural sufentanil for labour analgesia.

PURPOSE: The use of opioids in labour analgesia has primarily been as an adjuvant to local anesthetics. For early labour, satisfactory analgesia with epidural sufentanil alone is possible. This study evaluates the impact of epinephrine on sedative side effects and analgesia related to the latter technique. METHODS: After Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent this prospective, randomized, double-blind study evaluated 43 nulliparous subjects requesting epidural analgesia. The study site, a tertiary care obstetric unit, accommodates 3500-4500 deliveries annually. Group selection was randomized and blinded by selection of a sealed envelope containing a number which corresponded to a premixed labelled syringe of saline or epinephrine (100 microg/mL). An epidural catheter was placed in a standardized fashion. All subjects received 40 microg of sufentanil and 0.5 mL from the premixed syringe, diluted to 10 mL with NaCl. A blinded observer collected data on maternal sedation, lightheadedness, hemodynamics, oxygenation, and fetal heart rate over a one-hour period following sufentanil injection. RESULTS: The addition of epinephrine significantly (P <0.05) reduced the incidence of sedation and lightheadedness after epidural sufentanil at all data collection points, except two. Analgesic duration was also significantly prolonged by this addition (120 +/- 56 vs 84 +/- 32 min). Maternal satisfaction was high regardless of solution. CONCLUSION: Forty micrograms of epidural sufentanil produces satisfactory analgesia in early labour. The addition of epinephrine improves the side effect profile of this technique while prolonging the duration of analgesia. Epidural sufentanil requires attention to maternal monitoring of oxygenation as maternal desaturation occurred in both groups.