Controlled vs Spontaneous Ventilation for Bronchoscopy in Children with Tracheobronchial Foreign Body

Document Type : Original

Authors

1 Department of Anaesthesiology, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

2 Department of Anaesthesiology, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

3 Department of Paediatric Surgery, Sarvar Children’s Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

4 Research Center for Patient Safety, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. and Clinical Research Unit, Ghaem hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences.

5 Medical School and Neonatal Research Center, NICU of Emamreza Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Science, Iran.

6 Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

Abstract

Introduction
Tracheobronchial foreign body aspiration is a common life-threatening condition in children. There are controversies in the management of this condition, including the type of ventilation during bronchoscopy.  This study aims to compare anesthesia with controlled ventilation versus spontaneous ventilation in rigid bronchoscopy in children with foreign body aspiration.
 Materials and Methods:
Patients who were candidates for rigid bronchoscopy due to foreign body aspiration were randomly assigned to either anesthesia with spontaneous ventilation or controlled ventilation. End tidal CO2 (ETCO2), electrocardiogram (ECG), heart rate (HR), oxygen saturation (SpO2), non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and complications and accidents during the surgery and recovery were recorded for each patient. Surgeon comfort during the procedure was also evaluated for each patient. A 20% change in HR or NIBP was considered significant. SpO2 values under 90% are considered desaturation.
 Results:
Fifty-one patients (31 male and 20 female) entered the study. The mean age was 26.76 months, ranging from 6 to 100 months. Choking and cough were present in 94% and 96.1% of the patients, respectively. Nuts were the most common foreign body (76.9%). The controlled ventilation group had significantly fewer complications, and surgeon comfort was significantly higher in this group. Oxygen desaturation was significantly more prevalent in the spontaneous ventilation group during laryngoscopy and bronchoscopy (P<0.001).
 Conclusion:
Controlled ventilation has the potential to be used as an effective alternative option in anesthesia for patients with suspected foreign body aspiration.
 
 

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Singh H, Parakh A. Tracheobronchial Foreign Body Aspiration in Children. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2014;53(5):415–9.
2. Kim IA, Shapiro N, Bhattacharyya N. The national cost burden of bronchial foreign body aspiration in children. The Laryngoscope 2015; 125(5):1221–4.
3. Lowe DA, Vasquez R, Maniaci V. Foreign Body Aspiration in Children. Clin Pediatr Emerg Med 2015;16(3):140–8.
4. Zur KB, Litman RS. Pediatric airway foreign body retrieval: surgical and anesthetic perspectives. Paediatr Anaesth 2009;19 (Suppl 1):109–17.
5. Korlacki W, Korecka K, Dzielicki J. Foreign body aspiration in children: diagnostic and therapeutic role of bronchoscopy. Pediatr Surg Int 2011;27(8):833–7.
6. Chen L, Zhang X, Li S, Liu Y, Zhang T, Wu J. The risk factors for hypoxemia in children younger than 5 years old undergoing rigid bronchoscopy for foreign body removal. Anesth Analg 2009; 109(4):1079–1084.
7. Li S, Liu Y, Tan F, Chen J, Chen L. Efficacy of manual jet ventilation using Manujet III for bronchoscopic airway foreign body removal in children. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2010; 74(12):1401–1404.
8. Soodan A, Pawar D, Subramanium R. Anesthesia for removal of inhaled foreign bodies in children. Pediatr Anesth 2004;14(11):947–52.
9. Kendigelen P. The anaesthetic consideration of tracheobronchial foreign body aspiration in children. J Thorac Dis 2016; 8(12):3803–7.
10. Farrell PT. Rigid bronchoscopy for foreign body removal: anaesthesia and ventilation. Pediatr Anesth 2004;14(1):84–9.
11. Liu Y, Chen L, Li S. Controlled ventilation or spontaneous respiration in anesthesia for tracheobronchial foreign body removal: a meta-analysis. Pediatr Anesth 2014;24(10):1023–30.
12. Kelsey JL. Methods in observational epidemiology. Vol. 26. New York, USA: Oxford University Press; 1996.
13. Cheng J, Liu B, Farjat AE, Routh J. The public health resource utilization impact of airway foreign bodies in children. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2017;96:68–71.
14. Umesan UK, Chua KL, Balakrishnan P. Prevention and management of accidental foreign body ingestion and aspiration in orthodontic practice. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2012;8:245–52.
15. Punj J, Nagaraj G, Sethi D. Spontaneous ventilation and not controlled ventilation for removal of foreign body when present in both bronchi in a child. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2014;30(1):119–21.
16. Oğuzkaya F, Akçalı Y, Kahraman C, Bilgin M, Şahin A. Tracheobronchial foreign body aspirations in childhood: a 10-year experience. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1998;14(4):388–92.
17. Perrin G, Colt HG, Martin C, Mak MA, Dumon JF, Gouin F. Safety of interventional rigid bronchoscopy using intravenous anesthesia and spontaneous assisted ventilation. A prospective study. Chest 1992;102(5):1526–30.
18. Pinzoni F, Boniotti C, Molinaro SM, Baraldi A, Berlucchi M. Inhaled foreign bodies in pediatric patients: review of personal experience. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2007;71(12):1897–1903.
 
 
Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
Volume 29, Issue 6 - Serial Number 95
November and December 2017
Pages 333-340

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics