|
|
| |
Intubation with Cervical
Spine Trauma |
|
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 00:46:03 +0800
From: Jack Chong [cfchong@ms12.hinet.net]
How would you
intubate a case with highly suspected C-spine injury?
1. Would you
do it with the rigid neck collar in place (despite an assistant
is available to do the in-line immobilization).
2. Would you have tried the nasal route first if there is no significant
facial trauma and the patient is not apneic?
3. If N-M blocking agent was not available, and you decided to
intubate orally aided with deep sedation, which drug would you
prefer : midazolam or diprivan? Why?
Any suggestion
is welcomed.
|
|
Date:
Wed, 25 Jun 1997 19:21:23 -0400
From: Stephen M Stowe, M.D. [102747.3140@compuserve.com]
Removing the
cervical collar makes the positioning of the laryngoscope easier.
Therefore if an assistant is present to hold in line traction
that is the method I would use. If sedation is needed propofol
is probably prefered as its short duration of action is probably
better that a benzodiazapine.
Stephen M. Stowe,
M.D.
|
|
Date:
Thu, 26 Jun 1997 18:10:02 -0700
From: Gail Waldby MD [gwaldby@iw.net]
If you want to
hold cricoid pressure (a good idea to prevent aspiration), you have
to at least remove the front of the C-collar.
Gail Waldby, MD
Huron Clinic SD
|
|
Date:
Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:58:29 -0200
From: Marcio Augusto Lacerda [mlacerda@uol.com.br]
Prevent regurgitation
when the tracheal intubation is performed in trauma patient (
if you always consider this patients as "full stomach")but it
has some problems: the force that you should apply is tremendous
( about 40 Kg !!!) to prevent regurgitation in 95% of cases; it
is describile a high incidence of esophagus perforation due the
high pressure produced by regorgitation. But the problem discussed
is the same: how intubed with move the head and neck and without
a assistance ?
Marcio Lacerda
|
|
Date:
Sun, 29 Jun 1997 22:13:09 -0400
From: Louis Brusco Jr., M.D. [lb86@columbia.edu]
Some collars
(at least some of the ones I have seen) have a cut-out anteriorly
to allow cricoid pressure with the collar in place. I usually
give the patient one attempt at an intubation with the collar,
but, by the time I am called, someone has usually taken that one
try and I do it without the collar, with inline traction.
-- Louis Brusco
Jr., M.D.
Director, Critical Care Anesthesiology
Co-Director, Surgical Intensive Care Unit
St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, NYC
|
|
Date:
Thu, 26 Jun 1997 07:24:44 +0200
From: Jan De Waele [jan.dewaele@rug.ac.be]
Nasotracheal
intubation in a patient with suspected C-spine injury is never
performed by our Emergency Team, as these patients may also have
undiagnosed skull base fractures. Orotracheal intubation is preferred.
Midazolam is preffered over propofol as we had a few cases with
marked hypotension during induction, which should be avoided in
trauma patients, especially in the field.
Jan J. De Waele,
MD
Dept. of Surgery
University Hospital Ghent
Belgium.
|
|
Date:
Thu, 26 Jun 1997 00:00:00 -0400
From: Daniel M. Joyce, MD [joyced@VAX.CS.HSCSYR.EDU]
Re: intubations
in pt with suspected c-spine injury:
1)No, I would
remove the ant. portion of the collar while an assistant provides
in-line stabilization (not traction) while another assistant applies
cricoid pressure. I would induce the pt with pentothal and paralyze
with rocuronium - *notes: would use etomidate if hypotensive or
'near-hypotensive' if concomittant head injury is suspected. If
hypotensive without head injury would give ketamine. Would add
lidocaine (miniscule benefit) if head injured. Might add fentanyl
if hypertensive and head injured. If continued anesthesia/deep
sedation deemed likely in head injured patient, may start with
propofol and continue gtt.
2)Would not try
nasal route first. My take on the literature is that RSI with
in-line stabilization provides the best protection against c-spine
movement. *notes: would not do an RSI technique if a difficult
airway is suspected. Would then deep sedate, topically anesthetize
the airway and look with blade, if easy visualization is found,
would then administer paralytic and intubate. If no visualization
of larynx, would intubate over fiberoptic scope. If pt can't maintain
airway - would cut.
3)N-M drugs are
available.
Daniel M. Joyce,
MD
SUNY HSC-Syracuse, Dept. of EM
|
|
Date:
Thu, 26 Jun 1997 11:24:13 +0100
From: Nick Macartney [macartn@ibm.net]
I work in hospital,
so my answer must be read with this taken into consideration.
1) Usually yes,
but I do sometimes take off the collar. Depends on which I feel
will make intubation easiest in that case.
2) No Never.
I do a lot of nasal intubations in controlled conditions in the
operating theatre. IM (not very) HO, the concept of nasal intubation
in trauma cases is crazy. To intubate nasally, you either need
to do it blind, and that should result in a lot more neck movement
than oral intubation, or you do it with the aid of a laryngoscope,
in which case why on earth put the tube down the nose, and expose
the patient to the increased risk of sinusitis, nose bleed, mucosal
damage, retropharyngeal intubation ( tube goes behind the mucosa),
small tube causing increased resistance to respiration, increased
risk of blocking... need I go on?
3) Never the
case in hospital. If I had to intubate without neuromuscular blocker,
I would use 1 mg Alfentanil, 200 mg Propofol. Gives good conditions,
and has been written up, but I would not do this in a trauma case
( hypotension, what if I fail to intubate etc.)
Dr NJD Macartney
MBBS FRCA
ICU, Chase Farm Hospital
Enfield
Middlesex EN2 8JL
|
|
Date:
Thu, 26 Jun 1997 07:10:51 -0400 (ED
From: Charles Krin [Krin135@aol.com]
disclaimer: I'm
just a good old fashioned country doc whose ATLS is a bit out
of date, so if our big city breathren have a difference based
on number of cases, I won't complain. That said...
Personally, I
would prefer to intubate nasally with the collar in place if possible,
especially if I've got one of those fancy tubes with the draw
string attatched to the tip (which allows you to flex the tip
of the tube up a little bit at the critical time...). One problem
with nasal route (outside of certain problems with facial trauma)
is that you are limited in size- making it difficult to slide
a 'scope down the ETT if tracheal exploration is needed. Haven't
had to do much with either NMB or sedation, but our gas passer
swears by Diprivan for same.
also, consider
using the oral route with tube over flexible bronchoscope- allows
direct visualization of cords, and cannulation of same even when
the head is in an odd position or there is trauma. Haven't had
to do same, but have had some surgical trauma types indicate that
it works.
ck
Charles S. Krin, DO FAAFP
Member, PGBFH
KC5EVN
|
|
Date:
Thu, 26 Jun 1997 10:35:21 -0700
From: Charles E. Smith, MD [ces4@po.cwru.edu]
There is no best
way to do tracheal intubation in patients with c spine trauma.
It depends on the patient status, hemodynamics, presence of head
injury, aspiration risks, clinician experience, etc. In general,
if the patient is cooperative, I would opt for awake, sedated
fiberoptic intubation (flexible fiberoptic bronchoscope, Bullard
laryngoscope or WuScope). This technique requires a certain amount
of patient cooperation, ~ 10-15 min time, local anesthesia, antisialagogue
agent, and sedation. The advantage of this method is that optimal
visualization of the glottis can be achieved without any head
and neck movement, and the patient can be examined afterwards.
Note that a poorly
performed or inadequately performed fiberoptic intubation is frankly
dangerous and will probably cause more problems than one done
with induction of general anesthesia and neuromuscular blockade.
Also note that there is no data to support one method of intubation
over another as long as the head and neck remain immobilized.
However, with
head and neck immobilization, there will be a higher incidence
of grade III views of the larynx (i.e., only the epiglottis can
be seen with standard direct laryngoscopy- 20% in one study).
This is not usually a problem if one uses a fiberoptic device.
Alternatively, a gum-elastic bougie is very useful for intubating
patients with grade III views because all you have to do is direct
the bougie under the epiglottis anteriorly towards the glottis
and then thread the tracheal tube over the bougie.
|
|
Date:
Thu, 26 Jun 1997 20:27:30 +0100
From: Dr. Ed Walker [Ed_trauma@limeland.demon.co.uk]
I know necks
tend to take priority these days, but people DIE from airway obstruction.
They only end up paralysed from c.spine trauma.
Double-take.
All I'm trying to say is that if push comes to shove, airway ALWAYS
takes priority. If you're not skilled enough to intubate without
risking c.spine damage, then I'm afraid you have to just go right
on ahead and risk it, if you're the only one there.
--
Dr. Ed Walker FRCA
Staff Grade Practitioner, A&E
Dewsbury, Yorkshire, UK.
|
|
Date:
Thu, 26 Jun 1997 23:20:23 -0400
From: Stephen M. Stowe, M.D. [102747.3140@compuserve.com]
You have to be
careful with cricoid. pressure. C6 is the structure that you are
pressing teh cricoid against and it probable is not good form
to displace it if it is fractured :-)
Stephen M. Stowe,
M.D.
|
|
Date:
Sat, 28 Jun 1997 18:17:50 +0100
From: Dr. Ed Walker [Ed_trauma@limeland.demon.co.uk]
Sellick's original
article was a TINY little piece in the BMJ in 1962 (I think).
It has revolutionised anaesthetic practice ever since. Makes you
think, when you see the length of some of the 'research' articles
these days....
I wouldn't worry
too much about gastric contents. Their importance is over- stressed.
In the US I understand it is now standard practice to allow clear
fluids up until an hour pre-op. And how many times have I seen
a supposedly 'starved' patient vomit a whole truckload when they
wake up?
|
|
Date:
Sun, 29 Jun 1997 08:39:14 -0400
From: Stephen M. Stowe, M.D. [102747.3140@compuserve.com]
I generally agree
that the cricoid pressure is important and use it routinely since
I really do not believe all NPO patients are NPO. I am talking
here about a specific cercumstance when there is C--Spine injury
that may involve an unstable C-6. Here the relative risks of dispalcing
bone into the cord with the resultant quadrapelegia must be weighted
against the risk of aspiration.
A Combitube is
not an LMA it is a device with a large intraoral balloon and a
second balloon more distal. It is designed to be passed blindly
into either the esophagus or trachea. Inflating both balloons
isolates the oropharynx and permit ventilation.
|
|
Date:
Tue, 1 Jul 1997 08:02:49 -0400
From: Smith, J. Stanley, MD [JStanley.Smith@hmc.psu.edu]
Inline traction
is a misnomer. The correct semantic phrase should be in-line immobilization.
Traction on some cervical injuries makes the injury worse by recreating
the mechanism of the injury such as "hanging". Just remove the
front of the collar and hold the head and neck to prevent flexion.
|
|
Date:
Tue, 1 Jul 1997 20:28:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jeffrey S. Guy [JSGUY@aol.com]
I would first
place an LMA and then place an MLT endotracheal tube through the
lumen of the LMA. Using this technique you can place an ET without
ever having to visualize the cord or removing the patient from
the collar. This technique also works VERY well in the emergency
situation in which intubation in not possible. I would attempt
this prior to a surgical airway.
Jeffrey S. Guy,
MD
|
|