Cuffed versus uncuffed endotracheal tubes for neonates

被引:13
|
作者
Dariya, V [1 ]
Moresco, L. [2 ]
Bruschettini, M. [3 ,4 ]
Brion, L. P. [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Southwestern Med Ctr Dallas, Dept Pediat, Div Neonatal Perinatal Med, Dallas, TX 75390 USA
[2] Osped San Paolo, Pediat & Neonatol Unit, Savona, Italy
[3] Lund Univ, Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Clin Sci Lund, Paediat, Lund, Sweden
[4] Lund Univ, Skane Univ Hosp, Cochrane Sweden, Lund, Sweden
[5] Univ Texas Southwestern Dallas, Div Neonatal Perinatal Med, Dallas, TX USA
关键词
EMERGENCY CARDIOVASCULAR CARE; HEART-ASSOCIATION GUIDELINES; TRACHEAL TUBES; CARDIOPULMONARY-RESUSCITATION; UPPER AIRWAY; BRONCHOPULMONARY DYSPLASIA; LARYNGEAL DIMENSIONS; PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA; SUBGLOTTIC STENOSIS; CHILDREN;
D O I
10.1002/14651858.CD013736.pub2
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Endotracheal intubation is a commonly performed procedure in neonates, the risks of which are well-described. Some endotracheal tubes (ETT) are equipped with a cuff that can be inflated after insertion of the ETT in the airway to limit leak or aspiration. Cuffed ETTs have been shown in larger children and adults to reduce gas leak around the ETT, ETT exchange, accidental extubation, and exposure of healthcare workers to anesthetic gas during surgery. With improved understanding of neonatal airway anatomy and the widespread use of cuffed ETTs by anesthesiologists, the use of cuffed tubes is increasing in neonates. Objectives To assess the benefits and harms of cuffed ETTs (inflated or non-inflated) compared to uncuffed ETTs for respiratory support in neonates. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, and CINAHL on 20 August 2021; we also searched trial registers and checked reference lists to identify additional studies. Selection criteria We included randomized controlled trials (RCT5), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-randomized trials comparing cuffed (inflated and non-inflated) versus uncuffed ETTs in newborns. We sought to compare 1. inflated, cuffed versus uncuffed ETT; 2. non-inflated, cuffed versus uncuffed ETT; and 3. inflated, cuffed versus non-inflated, cuffed ETT. Data collection and analysis We used the standard methods of Cochrane Neonatal. Two review authors independently assessed studies identified by the search strategy for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Main results We identified one eligible RCT for inclusion that compared the use of cuffed (inflated if ETT leak greater than 20% with cuff pressure 20 cm H2O or less) versus uncuffed ETT. The author provided a spreadsheet with individual data. Among 76 infants in the original manuscript, 69 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this Cochrane Review. We found possible bias due to lack of blinding and other bias. We are very uncertain about frequency of postextubation stridor, because the confidence intervals (CI) of the risk ratio (RR) were very wide (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.35 to 5.25; risk difference (RD) 0.03, -0.11 to 0.18; 1 study, 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No neonate was diagnosed with postextubation subglottic stenosis; however, endoscopy was not available to confirm the clinical diagnosis. We are very uncertain about reintubation for stridor or subglottic stenosis because the Cls of the RR were very wide (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.49; RD -0.03, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.05; 1 study, 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No neonate had surgical intervention (e.g. endoscopic balloon dilation, cricoid split, tracheostomy) for stridor or subglottic stenosis (1 study, 69 participants). Neonates randomized to cuffed ETT may be less likely to have a reintubation for any reason (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.45; RD -0.39, 95% CI -0.57 to-0.21; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome 3, 95% CI 2 to 5; 1 study, 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about accidental extubation because the CIs of the RR were wide (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.12 to 5.46; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.10; 1 study, 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about all-cause mortality during initial hospitalization because the CIs of the RR were extremely wide (RR 2.46, 95% CI 0.10 to 58.39; RD 0.03, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.10; 1 study, 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There is one ongoing trial. We classified two studies as awaiting classification because outcome data were not reported separately for newborns and older infants. Authors' conclusions Evidence for comparing cuffed versus uncuffed ETTs in neonates is limited by a small number of babies in a single RCT with possible bias. There is very tow certainty evidence for all outcomes of this review. CIs of the estimate for postextubation stridor were wide. No neonate had clinical evidence for subglottic stenosis; however, endoscopy results were not available to assess the anatomy. Additional RCTs are necessary to evaluate the benefits and harms of cuffed ETTs (inflated and non-inflated) in the neonatal population. These studies must include neonates and be conducted both for short-term use (in the setting of the operating room) and chronic use (in the setting of chronic lung disease) of cuffed ETTs.
引用
收藏
页数:48
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cuffed versus uncuffed pediatric endotracheal tubes
    Anthony M. -H. Ho
    Manoj K. Karmakar
    Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, 2006, 53 : 106 - 107
  • [2] Cuffed versus uncuffed pediatric endotracheal tubes
    Ho, AMH
    Karmakar, MK
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA-JOURNAL CANADIEN D ANESTHESIE, 2006, 53 (01): : 106 - 107
  • [3] Cuffed versus uncuffed endotracheal tubes in neonates undergoing noncardiac surgeries: A randomized controlled trial
    Sarhan, Khaled
    Walaa, Rana
    Hasanin, Ahmed
    Elgohary, Manal
    Alkonaiesy, Ramy
    Nawwar, Kareem
    Elsonbaty, Mohamed
    Elsonbaty, Ahmad
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2024, 34 (10) : 1045 - 1052
  • [4] Endotracheal tubes in paediatric anaesthesia: the cuffed versus uncuffed debate
    Timmerman, K.
    Thomas, J. M.
    SOUTHERN AFRICAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2010, 16 (03) : 88 - 91
  • [5] Cuffed versus uncuffed endotracheal tubes in children: a meta-analysis
    Fenmei Shi
    Ying Xiao
    Wei Xiong
    Qin Zhou
    Xiongqing Huang
    Journal of Anesthesia, 2016, 30 : 3 - 11
  • [6] Cuffed versus uncuffed endotracheal tubes in children: a meta-analysis
    Shi, Fenmei
    Xiao, Ying
    Xiong, Wei
    Zhou, Qin
    Huang, Xiongqing
    JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA, 2016, 30 (01) : 3 - 11
  • [7] The use of cuffed versus uncuffed endotracheal tubes in pediatric intensive care
    Newth, CJL
    Rachman, B
    Patel, N
    Hammer, J
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS, 2004, 144 (03): : 333 - 337
  • [8] Cuffed versus uncuffed endotracheal tubes in pediatrics: a meta-analysis
    Chen, Liang
    Zhang, Jun
    Pan, Guoshi
    Li, Xia
    Shi, Tianwu
    He, Wensheng
    OPEN MEDICINE, 2018, 13 (01): : 366 - 373
  • [9] Cuffed Endotracheal Tubes in Neonates
    Gaspar, Nelia Santos
    Rocha, Gustavo
    Goncalves, Americo
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC INTENSIVE CARE, 2023,
  • [10] A review of cuffed vs uncuffed endotracheal tubes in children
    Crankshaw, D.
    McViety, J.
    Entwistle, M.
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA AND CRITICAL CARE JOURNAL, 2014, 2 (02): : 70 - 73