Jaw Elevation Device: Tool for Neck Immobilization to Facilitate Recovery in Endovascular Thrombectomy via Transcervical Access

Altschul, David; Vats, Tarini; Unda, Santiago R.; Osborn, Irene P.; McHenry, Janet; Zampolin, Richard L.

doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2020.05.011

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This device can be applied to sedated patients in supine position. A recent case report stated that JED is a practical device for reliable ventilation during neuroangiography and thrombectomy under sedation, and it was also effective after intervention for neck immobilization and airway opening [ 23 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Jaw Elevation Device vs. Conventional Airway Assist during Sedation in Chronic Kidney Diseases Undergoing Arteriovenous Fistula Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Lee

Jeong

Jang

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients with chronic renal failure (CRF) are likely to have obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) underdiagnosed, and maintaining airway patency is important during sedation. This study compared Jaw elevation device (JED) with conventional airway interventions (head lateral rotation, neck extension, oral or nasal airway insertion, and jaw thrust maneuver) during sedation and hypothesized that JED may be effective to open the airway. A total of 73 patients were allocated to a conventional group (n = 39) and a JED group (n = 34). The number of additional airway interventions was the primary outcome. Percentage of patients with no need of additional interventions and apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) were secondary outcomes. The number of additional interventions was significantly less in the JED group compared to the conventional group (0 (0–0) vs. 1 (0–2); p = 0.002). The percentage of patients with no requirement for additional interventions was significantly higher in the JED group compared to the conventional group (76.5% vs. 43.6%; p = 0.004). AHI was significantly lower in the JED group compared to the conventional group (4.5 (1.5–11.9) vs. 9.3 (3.8–21.9), p = 0.015). In conclusion, JED seems to be effective in opening the airway patency during sedation in CRF patients.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%