The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) pandemic has challenged medical systems and clinicians globally to unforeseen levels. Rapid spread of COVID-19 has forced clinicians to care for patients with a highly contagious disease without evidence-based guidelines. Using a virtual modified nominal group technique, the Pediatric Difficult Intubation Collaborative (PeDI-C), which currently includes 35 hospitals from 6 countries, generated consensus guidelines on airway management in pediatric anesthesia based on expert opinion and early data about the disease. PeDI-C identified overarching goals during care, including minimizing aerosolized respiratory secretions, minimizing the number of clinicians in contact with a patient, and recognizing that undiagnosed asymptomatic patients may shed the virus and infect health care workers. Recommendations include administering anxiolytic medications, intravenous anesthetic inductions, tracheal intubation using video laryngoscopes and cuffed tracheal tubes, use of in-line suction catheters, and modifying workflow to recover patients from anesthesia in the operating room. Importantly, PeDI-C recommends that anesthesiologists consider using appropriate personal protective equipment when performing aerosol-generating medical procedures in asymptomatic children, in addition to known or suspected children with COVID-19. Airway procedures should be done in negative pressure rooms when available. Adequate time should be allowed for operating room cleaning and air filtration between surgical cases. Research using rigorous study designs is urgently needed to inform safe practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. Until further information is available, PeDI-C advises that clinicians consider these guidelines to enhance the safety of health care workers during airway management when performing aerosol-generating medical procedures. These guidelines have been endorsed by the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia and the Canadian Pediatric Anesthesia Society.
Background
The success rates and related complications of various techniques for intubation in children with difficult airways remain unknown. The primary aim of this study is to compare the success rates of fiber-optic intubation via supraglottic airway to videolaryngoscopy in children with difficult airways. Our secondary aim is to compare the complication rates of these techniques.
Methods
Observational data were collected from 14 sites after management of difficult pediatric airways. Patient age, intubation technique, success per attempt, use of continuous ventilation, and complications were recorded for each case. First-attempt success and complications were compared in subjects managed with fiber-optic intubation via supraglottic airway and videolaryngoscopy.
Results
Fiber-optic intubation via supraglottic airway and videolaryngoscopy had similar first-attempt success rates (67 of 114, 59% vs. 404 of 786, 51%; odds ratio 1.35; 95% CI, 0.91 to 2.00; P = 0.16). In subjects less than 1 yr old, fiber-optic intubation via supraglottic airway was more successful on the first attempt than videolaryngoscopy (19 of 35, 54% vs. 79 of 220, 36%; odds ratio, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.04 to 4.31; P = 0.042). Complication rates were similar in the two groups (20 vs. 13%; P = 0.096). The incidence of hypoxemia was lower when continuous ventilation through the supraglottic airway was used throughout the fiber-optic intubation attempt.
Conclusions
In this nonrandomized study, first-attempt success rates were similar for fiber-optic intubation via supraglottic airway and videolaryngoscopy. Fiber-optic intubation via supraglottic airway is associated with higher first-attempt success than videolaryngoscopy in infants with difficult airways. Continuous ventilation through the supraglottic airway during fiber-optic intubation attempts may lower the incidence of hypoxemia.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.