Right upper lobe obstruction with right-sided double-lumen endobronchial tubes: A comparison of two tube types

Comparison of the accuracy of three methods measured the length of the right main stem bronchus by chest computed tomography as a guide to the use of right sided double-lumen tube

BACKGROUND

The variation of right main stem bronchus leads to the orifice of the right upper lobe bronchus may be obstructed or increase the incidence of malposition intraoperatively when the right sided double-lumen tube is used. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of three methods measured the length of the right main stem bronchus via chest computed tomography as a guide to the use of right sided double-lumen tube.

METHODS

In this study, 168 adult patients undergoing left sided thoracic surgery were included. All these patients were allocated to carina-proximal (C-P) group, carina-distal (C-D) group and carina-carina (C-C) group. The position of endobronchial cuff observed via Fiberoptic bronchoscopy after successful initial placement and after turning the patients to the lateral decubitus position, as well as the incidence of malposition of right sided double-lumen tube intraoperative were recorded to assess the accuracy of three methods in predicting the position of right sided double-lumen tube.

RESULTS

The distance between the carina to the proximal margin of the right upper lobe orifice, carina to the distal margin of the right upper lobe orifice and carina to the first right interlobar carina of the right upper lobe orifice were 17.2 ± 2.3 mm, 25.4 ± 3.7 mm and 28.5 ± 3.1 mm (P < 0.05). In the C-D group, the number of endobronchial cuffs seen to be herniating out of the carina, the number of bronchoscopies during initial placement and on the lateral position, the number of total malposition intraoperative and the number of reposition manoeuvres intraoperative were significantly less than the C-P group or the C-C group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The length of the right main stem bronchus measured by the carina to distal margin of right upper lobe orifice method was more accurate than the other two methods in guiding the use of right sided double-lumen tube.

TRIALS REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials. gov. no. NCT04127903. Registered at https://register.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov on 16/10/2019.

One-Lung Anesthesia Update

One-lung ventilation is used during a variety of cardiac, thoracic, and major vascular procedures. Endobronchial tubes, bronchial blockers, and occasionally, single-lumen tubes are used to isolate the lungs. Patients with difficult airways and pediatric patients provide special challenges for lung isolation. Finally, intraoperative hypoxia and hypercarbia in patients with intrinsic lung disease frequently complicate one-lung anesthesia. The concepts and controversies in lung isolation techniques are discussed.

Common Pitfalls in Anesthesia for Noncardiac Thoracic Surgery

Over the past few decades, major surgical procedures involving the thorax have become commonplace at most larger medical facilities. Advances in perioperative care have allowed surgeons to perform increasingly complex procedures. These procedures are being performed on more seriously ill patients who are at increased risk for significant complications. Recent advances should help the anesthesiologist avoid some of the pitfalls in managing these complex patients. Preoperative assessment aids in the identification of patients at highest risk for intraoperative and postoperative events. Particular attention is given to myasthenia gravis, as thymectomy is among the most common surgical procedures that are performed in these patients. Aggressive pain control techniques, including neuraxial opioids and patient-controlled analgesia, where appropriate, not only improve patient comfort but can improve postoperative pulmonary function. Advances in techniques for providing one-lung ventilation allow the anesthesiologist more options to individualize management for each clinical scenario. Careful fluid management may help to minimize the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. A basic understanding of video-assisted thoracic surgery should help the anesthesiologist provide optimal surgical conditions and perioperative care. Recent advances demand a greater role for the anesthesiologist if the best outcomes are to be achieved in patients undergoing thoracic procedures.

Endobronchial intubation in thoracic surgery: Which side should be preferred?

AIM

This study was undertaken to compare the clinical performance of right versus left double-lumen endotracheal tubes placed without using fiberoptic bronchoscopy in thoracic surgery operations.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of patients who were operated on in our institution between January 2013 and February 2014. We analyzed clinical performance in terms of hypoxia, hypercapnia, and adequate deflation of the lungs with both left- and right-sided double-lumen endotracheal tubes.

RESULTS

There were 80 patients with a mean age of 53.74 ± 15.59 years. Right-sided double-lumen tubes were used in 33 patients, and left-sided double-lumen tubes were used in 47. Perioperative hypoxi (p < 0.05), hypercapnia (p < 0.01), and inadequate deflation of the lung (p < 0.001) were found more frequently with the use of right-sided double-lumen endotracheal tubes. Arterial blood gas analyses in the post-anesthesia care unit showed that high pCO2 (>45 mm Hg), low pH (<7.36), and high lactate levels (>4 mmol L(-1)) were more frequent with right-sided double-lumen endotracheal tubes (p < 0.001). The incidence of atelectasis was greater (p < 0.001) and the duration of hospital stay was longer (p = 0.02) with the use of right-sided double-lumen endotracheal tubes.

CONCLUSION

Right-sided double-lumen endotracheal tubes resulted in poorer clinical performance. Therefore, a left-sided double-lumen endotracheal tube should be preferred in thoracic surgery operations when an appropriate size of fiberoptic bronchoscope is not available.

[Rupture of left main bronchus due to a left double-lumen tube in patient with a history of radiotherapy]

Airway injury caused by double-lumen tubes is a rare but potentially serious complication. We describe the case of a patient who had a bronchial rupture during one-lung ventilation with left double-lumen tube, complicated with a secondary cardiac arrest. She had a full recovery without sequelae. Underlying causes of the patient were a history of radiotherapy, and a possible overinflation of bronchial cuff, that it could contribute to the development of this complication. The possible airway injury should be considered by all practitioners who employ double-lumen tubes for the care of their patients.

One-lung ventilation for surgical repair of thoracic aortic aneurysm

Advances in the surgical approach to thoracic aortic aneurysm repairs have led to the increasing use of one-lung ventilation. Today's practice of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia requires a clear understanding of the techniques available for lung separation and the technical skills necessary to employ them. In this article, we discuss and evaluate the options for one-lung ventilation in thoracic aortic aneurysm repair with regard to preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative management.

Modified right-sided Broncho-Cath™ double lumen tube improves endobronchial positioning: a randomized study

OBJECTIVE

A left-sided double lumen tube is recommended for one-lung ventilation for most thoracic surgeries, but for certain indications, a right-sided double lumen tube (R-DLT) may be mandatory. Frequent malposition of R-DLTs has been reported. We propose an innovative modification of Mallinckrodt's Broncho-Cath R-DLT consisting of an enlarged area of the lateral orifice, and studied the impact of this modification on the adequacy of R-DLT positioning.

METHODS

Eighty adult patients scheduled for elective thoracic surgery were randomized into two groups: standard Broncho-Cath R-DLT, or modified Broncho-Cath R-DLT. After induction of anesthesia, the R-DLT was positioned using a fibreoptic bronchoscope. The position of the R-DLT was assessed on three occasions: with the patient supine (T1), then immediately following the patient's transfer to the lateral position (T2), and after repositioning of the tube, when needed, with the patient in lateral position (T3). A score ranging from 1 to 4 was accorded to the relative position of the right upper lobe (RUL) orifice in relation to the origin of the RUL bronchus.

RESULTS

The modified Broncho-Cath R-DLT was more frequently in an adequate position at T2: 77% vs 37% of patients (P = 0.0121), and easier to reposition at T3: 97% vs 74% of patients (P = 0.0109) in comparison to the standard Broncho-Cath R-DLT group.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest the superiority of the modified Broncho-Cath R-DLT compared to a standard Broncho-Cath R-DLT for optimal R-DLT positioning to facilitate one-lung ventilation during thoracic surgery.

Clinical review: Independent lung ventilation in critical care

Independent lung ventilation (ILV) can be classified into anatomical and physiological lung separation. It requires either endobronchial blockade or double-lumen endotracheal tube intubation. Endobronchial blockade or selective double-lumen tube ventilation may necessitate temporary one lung ventilation. Anatomical lung separation isolates a diseased lung from contaminating the non-diseased lung. Physiological lung separation ventilates each lung as an independent unit. There are some clear indications for ILV as a primary intervention and as a rescue ventilator strategy in both anatomical and physiological lung separation. Potential pitfalls are related to establishing and maintaining lung isolation. Nevertheless, ILV can be used in the intensive care setting safely with a good understanding of its limitations and potential complications.

Progress in lung separation

The progress in lung separation technology has allowed anesthesiologists to become skillful in fiberoptic bronchoscopy techniques and to provide excellent lung exposure in thoracic surgery patients. Given the availability of two technologies--DLTs (right-sided and left-sided) and bronchial blocker technology (TCBU, Arndt, and Cohen--every case that requires lung collapse and OLV should receive the benefit of these devices. Because of its greater margin of safety, a left-sided DLT is the more common device used in lung separation. If any contraindication to placing a left-sided DLT exists, a right-sided DLT is an option for any specific situation (eg, left lung transplantation). For a patient who requires lung separation and presents with the dilemma of a difficult or abnormal airway, bronchial blockers offer more advantages. Regardless of the device used, the optimal position of these devices (DLTs and bronchial blockers) is achieved best with the use of fiberoptic bronchoscopy techniques first in supine and then in lateral decubitus position or whenever repositioning of the device is needed.

Lung isolation techniques

Left-sided double-lumen endotracheal tubes should be the tube of choice for most cases in which lung isolation is required. A right-sided double-lumen endotracheal tube can be used effectively when a contraindication to placing a left-sided double-lumen endotracheal tube exists. The method of choice to select left-sided double-lumen endotracheal tubes is based on chest radiograph or CT scan measurements of the trachea or bronchus. Based on clinical reports, Univents or WEB blockers may be a better choice for patients with difficult airways who require one-lung ventilation or for when a selective lobar blockade is needed. For all selective intubation, the method of choice for proper tube placement and bronchial blockade is fiberoptic bronchoscopy with the patient in a supine position at first or in a lateral decubitus position later, or if a malposition occurs.

The incidence of right upper-lobe collapse when comparing a right-sided double-lumen tube versus a modified left double-lumen tube for left-sided thoracic surgery

Lung deflation for left-sided thoracic surgery can be accomplished by using either a left- or right-sided double-lumen endotracheal tube (L-DLT or R-DLT). Anatomic variability of the right mainstem bronchus and the possibility of right upper-lobe obstruction have discouraged the routine use of R-DLT. There are, however, situations in which it is preferable to avoid manipulation/intubation of the left main bronchus, requiring placement of a R-DLT. We compared the modified L-DLT with the R-DLT to determine whether R-DLTs can be used during left-sided thoracic surgery without an increased risk of right upper-lobe collapse. Forty patients requiring left lung deflation were randomly assigned to one of two groups. Twenty patients received a modified L-DLT BronchoCath((R)) (Mallinckrodt Medical Inc., St. Louis, MO), and 20 received a R-DLT BronchoCath((R)). The following variables were studied: 1) time required to position each tube until satisfactory placement was achieved; 2) number of times fiberoptic bronchoscopy was required to readjust tube position; 3) number of malpositions after initial tube placement; 4) time required for left lung collapse; 5) incidence of right upper-lobe collapse from an intraoperative chest radiograph obtained in a lateral decubitus position; 6) overall surgical exposure; and 7) tube acquisition cost. Median time required for initial tube placement was greater in the R-DLT group (3.4 min) versus the L-DLT (2.1 min); P = 0.04. Overall tube cost was also larger for the R-DLT group (US $1819.40) versus the L-DLT group (US $1107.75). The incidence of malpositions, (five versus two), need for fiberoptic bronchoscopy, time for adequacy of left lung collapse, and incidence of intraoperative right upper-lobe collapse (0) did not significantly differ between R-DLT and L-DLT groups. We conclude that R-DLTs can be used for left-sided thoracic surgery without an increased risk of right upper-lobe collapse. Our data suggest that R-DLTs may be more prone to intraoperative dislodgment/malposition than L-DLTs; however, in all cases, correction of malposition was easily achieved.

IMPLICATIONS

In this study, right-sided double-lumen tubes (R-DLTs) were compared with modified left-sided double-lumen tubes in patients requiring one-lung ventilation for left-sided thoracic surgery. The incidence of right upper-lobe collapse was assessed intraoperatively by a chest radiograph which showed no collapse of the right upper lobe in all patients who received R-DLTs or left-sided double-lumen tubes. Therefore, we conclude that R-DLTs present no increased risk of complications for left-sided thoracic surgery and should not be abandoned.

Is there a better right-sided tube for one-lung ventilation? A comparison of the right-sided double-lumen tube with the single-lumen tube with right-sided enclosed bronchial blocker

Anatomic variation between tracheal carina and the take-off of the right upper bronchus often makes the use of a right-sided double-lumen tube (R-DLT) or a single-lumen tube with right-sided enclosed bronchial blocker tube (R-UBB) (Univent) undesirable. This study compared the R-DLT with the R-UBB to determine whether there was any advantage of one over the other during anesthesia with one-lung ventilation (OLV) for right-sided thoracic surgeries. Forty patients requiring right lung deflation were randomly assigned to one of two groups. Twenty patients received a right-sided BronchoCath double-lumen tube, and 20 received a Univent tube with a bronchial blocker placed in the right mainstem bronchus. The following were studied: 1) time required to position each tube until satisfactory placement was achieved; 2) number of times that fiberoptic bronchoscopy was required (including one with the patient supine and one in lateral decubitus position); 3) number of malpositions after initial confirmation of tube placement; 4) time required until lung collapse; 5) surgical exposure; and 6) cost of tubes per case. No differences were found with any of these variables except that the cost of acquisition overall was greater for the R-UBB than for the R-DLT. No right upper lobe collapse was observed in the postoperative period in the chest radiograph in any of the patients studied. We conclude that either tube can be used safely and effectively for right-sided thoracic surgeries that require anesthesia for OLV.

IMPLICATIONS

In this study, right-sided double-lumen tubes were compared with the Univent with right-sided bronchial blockers. The results indicate that either tube can be used for right-sided thoracic surgery.

Isolation Techniques

The development of the specialty of thoracic surgery has closely paralleled the evolution of anesthetic tech niques that have allowed for effective, safe isolation of the lungs. A great number of different, often innovative, techniques have been used in the past to achieve lung isolation. This article will review many of these tech niques, but will emphasize the use of modern plastic double-lumen endobronchial tubes (DLT) and bronchial blockers. These are the two most popular ways of isolating the lungs today. The availability of fiberoptic bronchoscopes (FOB) to help confirm accurate place ment of these tubes and blockers has made functional isolation of the lungs not only safe, but relatively easy for any anesthesiologist to perform.

Comparison of a modified double-lumen endotracheal tube with a single-lumen tube with enclosed bronchial blocker

This study compared the modified BronchoCath double-lumen endotracheal tube with the Univent bronchial blocker to determine whether there were objective advantages of one over the other during anesthesia with one-lung ventilation (OLV). Forty patients having either thoracic or esophageal procedures were randomly assigned to one of two groups. Twenty patients received a left-side modified BronchoCath double-lumen tube (DLT), and 20 received a Univent tube with a bronchial blocker. The following were studied: 1) time required to position each tube until satisfactory placement was achieved; 2) number of times that the fiberoptic bronchoscope was required; 3) frequency of malpositions after initial placement with fiberoptic bronchoscopy; 4) time required until lung collapse; 5) surgical exposure ranked by surgeons blinded to type of tube used; and 6) cost of tubes per case. No differences were found in: 1) time required to position each tube (DLT 6.2 +/- 3.1 versus Univent 5.4 +/- 4.5 min [mean +/- SD]); 2) number of bronchoscopies per patient (DLT median 2, range 1-3 versus Univent median 3, range 2-5); or 3) time to lung collapse (DLT 7.1 +/- 5.4 versus Univent 12.3 +/- 10.5 min). The frequency of malposition was significantly lower for the DLT (5) compared to the Univent (15) (P < 0.003). Blinded evaluations by surgeons indicated that 18/20 DLT provided excellent exposure compared to 15/20 for the Univent group (P = not significant). We conclude that in spite of the greater frequency of malposition seen with the Univent, once position was corrected adequate surgical exposure was provided. In the Univent group the incidence of malposition and cost involved were both sufficiently greater that we cannot find cost/ efficacy justification for routine use of this device.

Independent lung ventilation

Situations in which independent lung ventilation may be of use include massive hemoptysis, pulmonary alveolar proteinosis, risk of interbronchial aspiration, unilateral lung injury, single lung transplant, and BPF. Any decision to attempt independent lung ventilation should take into consideration the many technical difficulties associated with the procedure. They include difficulties in the placement of DLTs and monitoring tube position, the risk of tube displacement, and the risk of airway trauma. The clinician also must consider the costs in terms of available manpower and resources. Maintaining a patient on independent lung ventilation requires highly skilled nursing care, specialized monitoring devices, and readily available FOB. Even with these limitations, independent lung ventilation may be of use in certain clinical situations when standard methods have failed.

Incidence of malposition of polyvinylchloride and red rubber left-sided double-lumen tubes and clinical sequelae

Currently, fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FB) is recommended for correct positioning of double-lumen endobronchial tubes (DLTs) because of the high incidence of malpositions not appreciated by clinical signs. The aims of this study were to assess whether clinical signs allow accurate confirmation of adequate positioning with left red rubber (RR) or polyvinyl-chloride (PVC) double-lumen tubes and to compare the incidence of malpositions between the two tubes. Another goal was to assess whether these malpositions, not appreciated by clinical assessment, adversely affected outcome. Twenty-one adult patients scheduled for elective thoracic surgery were randomly assigned to the RR (11 patients) or PVC group (10 patients). After endobronchial intubation, the position of the tubes was adjusted until clinically satisfactory lung separation had been achieved. A single investigator performed all the FB assessments were performed in the supine (SUP) and lateral positions. The anesthesiologists responsible for the clinical evaluation were "blinded" to the bronchoscopic findings. While in the SUP position, the tube was "too deep" to permit visualization of the carina during tracheal bronchoscopy in 5 patients (2 RR, 3 PVC). In 17 of 21 (10 RR, 7 PVC), the bronchial cuff could not be visualized, although in 1 patient (RR group), the cuff was overinflated and bulged out to partially obstruct the right main bronchus orifice. Bronchial bronchoscopy showed 4 of 11 patients in the RR group in whom the left upper lobe orifice was occluded compared with 1 only in the PVC group.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Robertshaw double lumen tubes: a reappraisal thirty years on

A prospective analysis of 100 successive intubations with Robertshaw tubes in patients submitted for routine thoracic surgery is presented. Clinical guidelines for intubation were used as the protocol. Tube position was judged on clinical assessment only and not confirmed with fibreoptic bronchoscopy. In approximately 60% of cases the tubes were judged to be correctly placed on initial introduction. In 20-30% of cases, minor and simple adjustments were required to achieve suitable conditions for one lung anaesthesia. In no case did it prove impossible to achieve conditions adequate for surgery. Common problems related to the endobronchial portion of tubes entering the wrong bronchus, being inserted too far, or not far enough. Two of six episodes of hypoxaemia related to minor problems with tubes and were easily corrected. The experience is compared with that of other workers. The pertinence and implications of the experience and the data to the training of personnel in the techniques of one-lung ventilation and the future of Robertshaw tubes are discussed. It is concluded that the good practical results achieved are specifically related to the Robertshaw design and the material of manufacture.

A quality improvement study of the placement and complications of double-lumen endobronchial tubes

To assess the complications of conventional and fiberoptic endobronchial intubations using reusable (Leyland, London) and disposable (Rüsch, Waiblinger, Germany; Sheridan, Argyle, NY) double-lumen tubes (DLTs), endobronchial intubations occurring over a 12-month period were prospectively studied at this hospital. Residents working with staff anesthesiologists placed either left or right reusable (Leyland) or disposable (Rüsch or Sheridan) DLTs. The DLT used, the use of fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB), findings at FOB if used during the intubation or operation, and complications occurring during the case (SpO2 < 90%, peak inflation pressure > 40 cm H2O, air trapping, poor lung isolation, and airway trauma) were recorded. Two hundred thirty-four intubations were analyzed (102 right, 132 left; 70 Leyland reusable DLTs, 66 Rüsch disposable tubes, and 98 Sheridan tubes). Physical signs alone were used to confirm tube position more frequently when Leyland tubes were placed compared with disposable tubes (79% v 39%, P < 0.0001). Rüsch and Sheridan DLTs had similar rates of conventional placement. Nineteen percent of reusable tubes and 44% of disposable tubes required position adjustments using FOB during the initial intubation (P = 0.0002). Disposable tubes also more commonly required readjustment using FOB during the operation (30% v 7%, P < 0.0005). Complications occurred in 42/234 patients (18%). The frequency of specific complications was: decreased SpO2, 9%; increased airway pressures, 9%; poor lung isolation, 7%; air trapping, 2%, and airway trauma, 0.4%. Right-sided Sheridan DLTs had a statistically higher incidence of malposition, resulting in poorer lung isolation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Reliability of auscultation in positioning of double-lumen endobronchial tubes

Auscultation is a well-established technique to confirm the position of double-lumen endobronchial tubes (DLTs). However, some authors have recommended that fibreoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) is also indicated. The aims of this study were to determine first if bronchoscopy after blind placement of DLTs improved positioning; and second if preoperative bronchoscopy could detect difficult intubation. Twenty-four patients undergoing aortic or lung surgery were studied. After intubation with a single-lumen tube, an initial FOB was performed by an independent observer to check the airway anatomy. Then, the single-lumen tube was replaced by a DLT using a classical "blind" intubation method. Subsequent FOB was performed first by the independent observer to record the DLT position and next by the investigators for improvement or correction of their positioning under visual control. Fibreoptic bronchoscopy after blind placement of DLTs resulted in repositioning 78% left-sided DLTs and 83% right-sided DLTs. Preoperative bronchoscopy did not always detect an airway abnormality which might lead to difficult positioning of the DLTs. In conclusion, auscultation is an unreliable method of confirming the position of DLTs and should be followed by fibreoptic bronchoscopy.

Fiberoptic bronchoscopic positioning of double-lumen tubes

This article has attempted to familiarize the anesthesiologist with the bronchoscopic appearance of normally and abnormally positioned double-lumen endobronchial tubes. Double-lumen tubes are being used in an increasing proportion of thoracic surgical cases in major centers. Double-lumen tubes are also being used more frequently in intensive care units for independent lung ventilation, bronchopleural fistula, massive hemoptysis, and other asymmetrical pulmonary disorders. Obstruction of the left or right upper lobe bronchus is the most common significant malposition with these tubes. If it occurs after the start of surgery it can be extremely difficult to diagnose clinically and can lead to dangerous levels of hypoxemia during one-lung ventilation. The risk/benefit ratio of fiberoptic bronchoscopy before the initiation of one-lung ventilation is extremely small. Due to variations in bronchial anatomy and intrathoracic pathology there will always be a certain percentage of cases in which the current designs of double-lumen tubes cannot be adequately positioned. The anesthesiologist's index of suspicion in these cases may be raised by examining the preoperative chest x-ray. Fiberoptic bronchoscopy is the most efficient and reliable method to position a double-lumen tube when the anatomy is distorted. When used as described, the FOB is a monitor. Like all new monitors it will take some time before there is a general consensus whether it is to be used routinely or only for certain indications. Whatever the final consensus on the indications for the FOB in double-lumen tube positioning, it is certain that all anesthesiologists involved in managing thoracic cases should be familiar with this technique.