Intubation Biomechanics: Clinical Implications of Computational Modeling of Intervertebral Motion and Spinal Cord Strain during Tracheal Intubation in an Intact Cervical Spine

Abstract

Background In a closed claims study, most patients experiencing cervical spinal cord injury had stable cervical spines. This raises two questions. First, in the presence of an intact (stable) cervical spine, are there tracheal intubation conditions in which cervical intervertebral motions exceed physiologically normal maximum values? Second, with an intact spine, are there tracheal intubation conditions in which potentially injurious cervical cord strains can occur? Methods This study utilized a computational model of the cervical spine and cord to predict intervertebral motions (rotation, translation) and cord strains (stretch, compression). Routine (Macintosh) intubation force conditions were defined by a specific application location (mid-C3 vertebral body), magnitude (48.8 N), and direction (70 degrees). A total of 48 intubation conditions were modeled: all combinations of 4 force locations (cephalad and caudad of routine), 4 magnitudes (50 to 200% of routine), and 3 directions (50, 70, and 90 degrees). Modeled maximum intervertebral motions were compared to motions reported in previous clinical studies of the range of voluntary cervical motion. Modeled peak cord strains were compared to potential strain injury thresholds. Results Modeled maximum intervertebral motions occurred with maximum force magnitude (97.6 N) and did not differ from physiologically normal maximum motion values. Peak tensile cord strains (stretch) did not exceed the potential injury threshold (0.14) in any of the 48 force conditions. Peak compressive strains exceeded the potential injury threshold (–0.20) in 3 of 48 conditions, all with maximum force magnitude applied in a nonroutine location. Conclusions With an intact cervical spine, even with application of twice the routine value of force magnitude, intervertebral motions during intubation did not exceed physiologically normal maximum values. However, under nonroutine high-force conditions, compressive strains exceeded potentially injurious values. In patients whose cords have less than normal tolerance to acute strain, compressive strains occurring with routine intubation forces may reach potentially injurious values. Editor’s Perspective What We Already Know about This Topic What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Rapidly Deteriorating Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Following Ventricular Shunt Revision for Hydrocephalus: Case Report

“…This increases the loading on the spinal cord via stretch but also reduces the spinal canal diameter. For an individual with a normal cervical spine, this has no consequence [4]. However, in patients with cervical stenosis, this could lead to further injury [4] and hypoperfusion [5][6][7].…”

Styletubation versus Laryngoscopy: A New Paradigm for Routine Tracheal Intubation

“…It has been modeled that laryngoscopy itself might cause cervical motion and compressive strains on cervical spinal cords. The effects may exceed potentially injurious values with routine intubation forces [111,112]. Variables included laryngoscope-specific cervical extension, airway displacement/deformation needed for tracheal intubation, in additional to different cervical spine and airway tissue viscoelastic properties [113].…”

Styletubation versus Laryngoscopy: A New Paradigm for Routine Tracheal Intubation

“…It has been modeled that laryngoscopy itself might cause cervical motion and compressive strains on cervical spinal cords. The effects may exceed potentially injurious values with routine intubation forces [111,112]. Variables included laryngoscope-specific cervical extension, airway displacement/deformation needed for tracheal intubation, in addition to different cervical spine and airway tissue viscoelastic properties [113].…”