Large-diameter suction system reduces oropharyngeal evacuation time

VandenBerg, James; Lutz, Robert H.; Vinson, David R.

doi:10.1016/s0736-4679(99)00119-5

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Two new papers have studied the size of suction systems. In a very small RCO study, Vandenberg et al (53) demonstrated that a larger oral suction tip and tubing removed thicker substances from the oropharynx more quickly ( Table 7). In a bench study, Stenqvist et al (52) found that a larger catheter (14 Fr versus 12 Fr) inserted into a smaller endotracheal tube (7 mm versus 8 mm) generated a much lower subatmospheric pressure (OS system).…”

Section: Miscellaneous Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Updating the Evidence Base for Suctioning Adult Patients: A Systematic Review

Overend

Anderson

Brooks

et al. 2009

Canadian Respiratory Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Miscellaneous Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Updating the Evidence Base for Suctioning Adult Patients: A Systematic Review

Overend

Anderson

Brooks

et al. 2009

Canadian Respiratory Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Large-bore tubing is preferred to smaller tubing, as hydraulic resistance is inversely proportional to the fourth power of the tubing’s radius [ 37 , 39 , 41 ]. Interviews with combat medics on required characteristics indicated the interior diameter of the tubing is a priority for effective suction [ 8 ].…”

Section: Rationale For the Proposed Standards/guidelinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ISO 10079-1 states that suction tubing must have an inside diameter of no less than 6 mm. In a study conducted by Vanderberg et al, the 6 mm tubing used became obstructed in 11 out of 12 instances while evacuating simulated vomitus solution [ 36 , 37 ]. Though the study was conducted using wall suction available in hospitals, the vacuum pressure employed was 500 mmHg, which is above the ISO standard for minimum requirements for vacuum pressure, suggesting portable units could fare even worse.…”

Section: Rationale For the Proposed Standards/guidelinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Portable Medical Suction and Aspirator Devices: Are the Design and Performance Standards Relevant?

Peri

Akhter

Lorenzo

et al. 2022

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Airway clearance refers to the clearing of any airway blockage caused due to foreign objects such as mud, gravel, and biomaterials such as blood, vomit, or teeth fragments using the technology of choice, portable suction devices. Currently available devices are either too heavy and bulky to be carried, or insufficiently powered to be useful despite being in accordance with the ISO 10079-1 standards. When applied to portable suction, the design and testing standards lack clinical relevancy, which is evidenced by how available portable suction devices are sparingly used in pre-hospital situations. Lack of clinical relevancy despite being in accordance with design/manufacturing standards arise due to little if any collaboration between those developing clinical standards and the bodies that maintain design and manufacturing standards. An updated set of standards is required that accurately reflects evidence-based requirements and specifications, which should promote valid, rational, and relevant engineering designs and manufacturing standards in consideration of the unique scenarios facing prehospital casualty care. This paper aims to critically review the existing standards for portable suction devices and propose modifications based on the evidence and requirements, especially for civilian prehospital and combat casualty care situations.

show abstract

“…20 Aspiration of as little as 25mL of vomitus is capable of causing significant pulmonary aspiration injury, and massive aspiration poses a mortality rate as high as 70%. 22,23 Delaying suction can increase the exposure risk of aspiration as well as immediate obstruction-related hypoxia. 22 Fluid-and debris-obscured visualization of key anatomic landmarks makes laryngoscopic tracheal intubation virtually impossible, so the availability and performance of controlled suction is essential.…”

Section: Evidence Of Need For Suction In Combat Casualty Carementioning

confidence: 99%

“…22,23 Delaying suction can increase the exposure risk of aspiration as well as immediate obstruction-related hypoxia. 22 Fluid-and debris-obscured visualization of key anatomic landmarks makes laryngoscopic tracheal intubation virtually impossible, so the availability and performance of controlled suction is essential.…”

Section: Evidence Of Need For Suction In Combat Casualty Carementioning

confidence: 99%

Airway Clearance Using Suction Devices in Prehospital Combat Casualty Care: A Systematic Review

Jain

Akhter

Schoppe

et al. 2020

Prehosp. Disaster med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Airway management is at the forefront for combat medics dealing with battlefield trauma. For military service members, compromised airways are the second leading cause of potentially survivable death on the battlefield, accounting for one in ten preventable combat deaths. Effective suction is a critical component of airway clearance. However, currently available devices are too heavy and bulky to be carried by combat medics and are insufficiently powered. The industry has not responded to the need, with companies continuing to produce models using 1970s technology. A literature review was completed with the assistance of a librarian. The databases searched included: Biomedical Research Database (BRD), Computer Retrieval of Information of Scientific Projects (CRISP), Federal Research in Progress (FEDRIP), Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), Pub Med/Medline, and OVID. Additionally, a Google Scholar search was performed to identify nonstandard sources. After screening, a total of 40 articles were used. There were no randomized controlled trials or other high-quality evidence that addressed the issues; there was limited peer-reviewed literature on the use, effectiveness, adverse effects, and safety of suction for use in combat casualty care. A review of the available literature revealed no standards, either proposed, validated, or accepted, for the safety or avoidance of adverse effects for portable suction device use in combat casualty care. Similarly, there are no accepted standards to guide the safe use and anticipated adverse effects of suction for use in prehospital combat or emergency care. Nevertheless, there are meaningful data that can be extracted from the few studies available combined with non-clinical studies, narrative reviews and case reports, and expert opinions.

show abstract

Large-diameter suction system reduces oropharyngeal evacuation time

Cited by 4 publications

References 13 publications

Updating the Evidence Base for Suctioning Adult Patients: A Systematic Review

Updating the Evidence Base for Suctioning Adult Patients: A Systematic Review

Portable Medical Suction and Aspirator Devices: Are the Design and Performance Standards Relevant?

Airway Clearance Using Suction Devices in Prehospital Combat Casualty Care: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About