Airway Management during Spaceflight

Author:

Keller Christian1,Brimacombe Joseph2,Giampalmo Marzia3,Kleinsasser Axel4,Loeckinger Alex4,Giampalmo Giuseppe5,Pühringer Fritz6

Affiliation:

1. Consultant Anaesthetist, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Leopold-Franzens University.

2. Clinical Professor, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, University of Queensland, Cairns Base Hospital.

3. Resident Anaesthetist, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Policlinico Universitario Umberto I.

4. Resident Anaesthetist, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Leopold-Franzens University.

5. Head of International Relations, European Space Agency.

6. Associate Professor, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Leopold-Franzens University.

Abstract

Background The authors compared airway management in normogravity and simulated microgravity with and without restraints for laryngoscope-guided tracheal intubation, the cuffed oropharyngeal airway, the standard laryngeal mask airway, and the intubating laryngeal mask airway. Methods Four trained anesthesiologist-divers participated in the study. Simulated microgravity during spaceflight was obtained using a submerged, full-scale model of the International Space Station Life Support Module and neutrally buoyant equipment and personnel. Customized, full-torso manikins were used for performing airway management. Each anesthesiologist-diver attempted airway management on 10 occasions with each device in three experimental conditions: (1) with the manikin at the poolside (poolside); (2) with the submerged manikin floating free (free-floating); and (3) with the submerged manikin fixed to the floor using a restraint (restrained). Airway management failure was defined as failed insertion after three attempts or inadequate device placement after insertion. Results For the laryngoscope-guided tracheal intubation, airway management failure occurred more frequently in the free-floating (85%) condition than the restrained (8%) and poolside (0%) conditions (both, P < 0.001). Airway management failure was similar among conditions for the cuffed oropharyngeal airway (poolside, 10%; free-floating, 15%; restrained, 15%), laryngeal mask airway (poolside, 0%; free-floating, 3%; restrained, 0%), and intubating laryngeal mask airway (poolside, 5%; free-floating, 5%; restrained, 10%). Airway management failure for the laryngoscope-guided tracheal intubation was usually caused by failed insertion (> 90%), and for the cuffed oropharyngeal airway, laryngeal mask airway, and intubating laryngeal mask airway, it was always a result of inadequate placement. Conclusion The emphasis placed on the use of restraints for conventional tracheal intubation in microgravity is appropriate. Extratracheal airway devices may be useful when restraints cannot be applied or intubation is difficult.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Reference21 articles.

Cited by 38 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3