Prehospital endotracheal intubation vs extraglottic airway device in blunt trauma

In-hospital mortality after prehospital endotracheal intubation versus alternative methods of airway management in trauma patients. A cohort study from the TraumaRegister DGU®

PURPOSE

Prehospital airway management in trauma is a key component of care and is associated with particular risks. Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is the gold standard, while extraglottic airway devices (EGAs) are recommended alternatives. There is limited evidence comparing their effectiveness. In this retrospective analysis from the TraumaRegister DGU®, we compared ETI with EGA in prehospital airway management regarding in-hospital mortality in patients with trauma.

METHODS

We included cases only from German hospitals with a minimum Abbreviated Injury Scale score ≥ 2 and age ≥ 16 years. All patients without prehospital airway protection were excluded. We performed a multivariate logistic regression to adjust with the outcome measure of hospital mortality.

RESULTS

We included n = 10,408 cases of whom 92.5% received ETI and 7.5% EGA. The mean injury severity score was higher in the ETI group (28.8 ± 14.2) than in the EGA group (26.3 ± 14.2), and in-hospital mortality was comparable: ETI 33.0%; EGA 30.7% (27.5 to 33.9). After conducting logistic regression, the odds ratio for mortality in the ETI group was 1.091 (0.87 to 1.37). The standardized mortality ratio was 1.04 (1.01 to 1.07) in the ETI group and 1.1 (1.02 to 1.26) in the EGA group.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in mortality rates between the use of ETI or EGA, or the ratio of expected versus observed mortality when using ETI.

Tick-tock: Prehospital intubation is associated with longer field time without any survival benefit

BACKGROUND

Prehospital endotracheal intubation is a debated topic, and few studies have found it beneficial after trauma. A growing body of evidence suggests that prehospital endotracheal intubation is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Our study was designed to compare patients with attempted prehospital endotracheal intubation to those intubated promptly upon emergency department arrival.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a single-center trauma research data repository was utilized. Inclusion criteria included age ≥15 years, transport from the scene by ground ambulance, and undergoing prehospital endotracheal intubation attempts or intubation within 10 minutes of emergency department arrival without prior prehospital endotracheal intubation attempt. Propensity score matching was used to minimize differences in baseline characteristics between groups. Standard mean differences are also presented for pre- and post-matching datasets to evaluate for covariate balance.

RESULTS

In total, 208 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 95 patients (46%) underwent prehospital endotracheal intubation, which was successful in 47% of cases. A control group of 113 patients (54%) were intubated within 10 minutes of emergency department arrival. We performed propensity score matching between cohorts based on observed differences after univariate analysis and used standard mean differences to estimate covariate balance. After propensity score matching, patients who underwent prehospital endotracheal intubation experienced a longer time on scene as compared with those intubated in the emergency department (9 minutes [interquartile range 6-12] vs 6 minutes [interquartile range 5-9], P < .01) without difference in overall mortality (67% vs 65%, P = 1.00). Rapid sequence intubation was not used in the field; however, it was used for 58% of patients intubated within 10 minutes of emergency department arrival. After matched analysis, patients with a failed prehospital intubation attempt were equally likely to receive rapid sequence intubation during re-intubation in the emergency department as compared with those undergoing a first attempt (n = 13/28, 46% vs n = 28/63, 44%, P = 1.00, standard mean differences 0.04). Among patients with prehospital arrest (n = 98), prehospital endotracheal intubation was associated with shorter time to death (8 minutes [interquartile range 3-17] vs 14 minutes [interquartile range 8-45], P = .008) and longer total transport time (23 minutes [interquartile range 19-31] vs 19 minutes [interquartile range 16-24], P = .006), but there was no difference in observed mortality (n = 29/31, 94% vs n = 30/31, 97%, P = 1.00, standard mean differences = 0.15) after propensity score matching.

CONCLUSION

Prehospital providers should prioritize expeditious transport over attempting prehospital endotracheal intubation, as prehospital endotracheal intubation is inconsistently successful, may delay definitive care, and appears to have no survival benefit.

Bag-Valve Mask versus Endotracheal Intubation in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest on Return of Spontaneous Circulation: A National Database Study

Background

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is the main issue for pre-hospital emergency care. There are several airway managements during the out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) such as endotracheal intubation (ETI) or alternative airway device: bag-valve mask (BVM). Data comparing both methods showed inconclusive results on survival and limited results on CPR outcome. This study aimed to add additional results on comparing the ETI and BVM in cardiac arrest outside hospitals; focused on the CPR outcome.

Methods

This study was a retrospective, analytical study. The inclusion criteria were adult patients (age of 18 years or over) with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, who received emergency life support, and received either BVM or ETI. Data were retrieved from the Information Technology of Emergency Medical Service. The outcome was a return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC).

Results

During the study period, there were 1070 patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who met the study criteria. Of those, 800 patients (74.77%) received BVM, while the other 270 patients (25.23%) received ETI. There were five significant factors between both groups including mean distance to scene, proportions of response time less than 8 mins, defibrillation, intravenous fluid administration, and adrenaline administration. There was no significant difference on the outcome: ROSC. The BVM group had slightly higher rate of ROSC than the ETI group (19.63% vs 15.56%; p value 0.148).

Conclusion

The BVM and ETI had comparable ROSC rate for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest victims. However, the study population of the BVM group had less severe conditions and received faster treatment than the ETI group.

Advanced airway management in out of hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the difference in survival and neurological outcomes between endotracheal tube (ETT) intubation and supraglottic airway (SGA) devices used during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).

METHODS

A systematic search of five databases was performed by two independent reviewers until September 2018. Included studies reported on (1) OHCA or cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and (2) endotracheal intubation versus supraglottic airway device intubation. Exclusion criteria (1) stimulation studies, (2) selectively included/excluded patients, (3) in-hospital cardiac arrest. Odds Ratios (OR) with random effect modelling was used. Primary outcomes: (1) return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), (2) survival to hospital admission, (3) survival to hospital discharge, (4) discharge with a neurologically intact state.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies (n = 539,146) showed that overall, ETT use resulted in a heterogeneous, but significant increase in ROSC (OR = 1.44; 95%CI = 1.27 to 1.63; I² = 91%; p < 0.00001) and survival to admission (OR = 1.36; 95%CI = 1.12 to 1.66; I² = 91%; p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in survival to discharge or neurological outcome (p > 0.0125). On sensitivity analysis of RCTs, there was no significant difference in ROSC, survival to admission, survival to discharge or neurological outcome (p > 0.0125). On analysis of automated chest compression, without heterogeneity, ETT provided a significant increase in ROSC (OR = 1.55; 95%CI = 1.20 to 2.00; I² = 0%; p = 0.0009) and survival to admission (OR = 2.16; 95%CI = 1.54 to 3.02; I² = 0%; p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall heterogeneous benefit in survival with ETT was not replicated in the low risk RCTs, with no significant difference in survival or neurological outcome. In the presence of automated chest compressions, ETT intubation may result in survival benefits.

Are prehospital airway management resources compatible with difficult airway algorithms? A nationwide cross-sectional study of helicopter emergency medical services in Japan

Purpose

Immediate access to the equipment required for difficult airway management (DAM) is vital. However, in Japan, data are scarce regarding the availability of DAM resources in prehospital settings. The purpose of this study was to determine whether Japanese helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) are adequately equipped to comply with the DAM algorithms of Japanese and American professional anesthesiology societies.

Methods

This nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted in May 2015. Base hospitals of HEMS were mailed a questionnaire about their airway management equipment and back-up personnel. Outcome measures were (1) call for help, (2) supraglottic airway device (SGA) insertion, (3) verification of tube placement using capnometry, and (4) the establishment of surgical airways, all of which have been endorsed in various airway management guidelines. The criteria defining feasibility were the availability of (1) more than one physician, (2) SGA, (3) capnometry, and (4) a surgical airway device in the prehospital setting.

Results

Of the 45 HEMS base hospitals questioned, 42 (93.3 %) returned completed questionnaires. A surgical airway was practicable by all HEMS. However, in the prehospital setting, back-up assistance was available in 14.3 %, SGA in 16.7 %, and capnometry in 66.7 %. No HEMS was capable of all four steps.

Conclusion

In Japan, compliance with standard airway management algorithms in prehospital settings remains difficult because of the limited availability of alternative ventilation equipment and back-up personnel. Prehospital health care providers need to consider the risks and benefits of performing endotracheal intubation in environments not conducive to the success of this procedure.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00540-015-2124-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.