Comparison of Hemodynamics in Jet Ventilation vs. Intermittent Apnea for Airway Stenosis Surgery

Abstract

ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to assess the impact of two different ventilation techniques, jet ventilation and apneic anesthesia with intermittent ventilation (AAIV), on patient hemodynamics and operative time during endoscopic laryngotracheal stenosis surgery.MethodsRetrospective chart review of patients who underwent airway dilation for laryngotracheal stenosis by a single surgeon at a single institution from October 1, 2000 through January 2, 2020. Logistic regression, Mann–Whitney U tests and chi square analysis were used to determine statistical significance.ResultsA total of 157 patients, 43 (27.4%) male and 114 (72.6%) female, and 605 total encounters were included for analysis. There were no significant differences in hemodynamic outcomes when comparing the AAIV and jet ventilation groups. Specifically, there was no significant difference in either peak end‐tidal CO2 or nadir O2 saturation between the AAIV and jet ventilation groups (p = 0.4016) and (p = 0.1357), respectively. The patients in the AAIV group had a significantly higher median BMI 32.93 (27.40–39.40) compared with 28.80 (24.1–32.65) (p = 0.0001). Although not necessarily clinically significant, patients with higher BMI had lower median O2 nadirs (97.8%) than non‐obese patients (99.2%) (p < 0.0001). The median total procedure time was equivalent when comparing the two ventilation techniques.ConclusionAAIV is a safe method of ventilation for patients undergoing endoscopic laryngotracheal stenosis surgery with no significant differences in patient hemodynamics or procedure time when compared with jet ventilation. AAIV was the preferred method of ventilation for obese patients undergoing endoscopic laryngotracheal stenosis surgery.Level of Evidence3 Laryngoscope, 2023