18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Safety issues of endobronchial intubation for one-lung ventilation in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in neonates: Can we extubate on the table?

      letter

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Sir, Advances in pediatric anesthesia have made it possible for complex surgical procedures such as video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS)[1] in neonates. However, VATS in neonates remains a challenge because of a different anatomy and challenging physiology compared to older children.[2] Different techniques described for one-lung ventilation (OLV) in pediatric patients may sound assuring, but it is practically difficult and challenging to execute. Moreover, techniques describe for older children cannot be extrapolated to neonatal practice. We report our experience of anesthetic management of a term neonate (20 days) weighing 3200 g with an isolated left diaphragm eventration for VATS repair. The child had a saturation of 97% in room air. After intravenous induction, right main stem bronchus (MSB) was intubated with a 3.5 mm ID endotracheal tube (ETT). OLV was confirmed by auscultation of the chest as a compatible fiberoptic bronchoscope was not available. Right radial artery was cannulated and the neonate was positioned. Thoracic cavity was insufflated with CO2 to attain a pressure of 4 mmHg. Pressure control ventilation was used with a set pressure of 15 mmHg; respiratory rate =30/min; positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) = 4. During the surgery, there was a continuous rise in the end-tidal CO2 (ETCO2) level, so the set pressure was gradually increased to 30 mmHg and the intrathoracic pressure decreased to 2 mmHg to achieve the required minute ventilation. Intermittent manual ventilation was required with 100% oxygen to wash out the retained CO2. A blood gas sample analysis of PaCO2 corroborated with the high ETCO2. The operation lasted for 70 min, and the ETT was withdrawn by 1.5 cm for both-lung ventilation toward the end of surgery. The PaCO2 at the end of surgery was significantly raised with respiratory acidosis, and hence, the child was shifted to neonatal intensive care unit for mechanical ventilation in the postoperative period. Ventilator support was gradually weaned off, and trachea was extubated 5 h later, and the perioperative outcome was uneventful. OLV, though preferable, is not mandatory for all VATS procedures.[2] Neonates are more prone to desaturation during OLV due to increase oxygen consumption, more V/Q mismatch in lateral decubitus position,[2 3 4] and decrease functional residual capacity.[2 4] The main concerns are hypoxemia, hypercarbia, hypothermia, and hemodynamic instability during CO2 insufflation. The options available for OLV in neonates are limited. Endobronchial intubation and blocker[4] can be used for OLV in newborn. The safety margin of MSB intubation for OLV is low due to tracheobronchial injury, obstruction of upper lobe bronchus, inability to provide endotracheal suction or PEEP to nondependent lung,[4] and minimal peri-tube leakage of air can underestimate the ETCO2. There is no established gold standard for OLV and ventilation strategies during VATS in neonates, and there are limited data on the safety concern for anesthetic management of VATS in neonates. Vigilant monitoring during OLV in neonates is required as ETCO2 can underestimate hypercarbia. Blood gas analysis can guide us for postoperative ventilator requirement apart from intraoperative hemodynamic monitoring. Whether to extubate on the table has to be decided as per the perioperative events and has to be individualized. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

          Related collections

          Most cited references4

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          First decade's experience with thoracoscopic lobectomy in infants and children.

          This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of thoracoscopic lobectomy in infants and children. From January 1995 to March 2007, 97 patients underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic lobe resection. Ages ranged from 2 days to 18 years and weights from 2.8 to 78 kg. Preoperative diagnosis included sequestration/congenital adenomatoid malformation (65), severe bronchiectasis (21), congenital lobar emphysema (9), and malignancy (2). Of 97 procedures, 93 were completed thoracoscopically. Operative times ranged from 35 minutes to 210 minutes (average, 115 minutes). There were 19 upper, 11 middle, and 67 lower lobe resections. There were 3 intraoperative complications (3.1%) requiring conversion to an open thoracotomy. Chest tubes were left in 88 of 97 procedures for 1 to 3 days (average, 2.1 days). Hospital stay ranged from 1 to 12 days (average, 2.4 days). Thoracoscopic lung resection is a safe and efficacious technique. It avoids the inherent morbidity of a major thoracotomy incision and is associated with the same decrease in postoperative pain, recovery, and hospital stay as seen in minimally invasive procedures.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Anesthetic management of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in pediatric patients: the issue of safety in infant and younger children

            Background The purpose of this study was to assess the safety issues concerning anesthetic management of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in pediatric patients. Methods The medical records of 52 pediatric patients undergoing VATS using general anesthesia and one-lung ventilation (OLV) were reviewed. OLV was achieved with a Fogarty catheter (n = 23) or endobronchial intubation (n = 7) in patients 50 mmHg) was observed more frequently in group Y (40%) than in group O (0%; P < 0.05). The difference between the ETCO2 and PaCO2 was 10.4 ± 8.9 mmHg in group Y and 4.6 ± 3.9 mmHg in group O (P < 0.05). Hypercarbia and acidosis occurred more frequently in patients with CO2 insufflation than those without insufflation in group Y. Conclusions Although the anesthesia for VATS in pediatric patients was successfully accomplished, the infants and younger children presented with more intra-operative problems when compared with older children. The anesthetic management for VATS in infants and younger children requires careful and vigilant monitoring.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Single-lung ventilation in infants and children.

              During the past decade, the use of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has dramatically increased in children as well as adults. Although VATS can be performed while both lungs are being ventilated, single-lung ventilation (SLV) is desirable during VATS. In addition, anaesthesiologists are performing (and paediatric surgeons are requesting) SLV more frequently for open thoracotomies in infants and children.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Saudi J Anaesth
                Saudi J Anaesth
                SJA
                Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia
                Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd (India )
                1658-354X
                0975-3125
                Apr-Jun 2017
                : 11
                : 2
                : 254-255
                Affiliations
                [1]Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
                Author notes
                Address for correspondence: Dr. Neisevilie Nisa, Department of Anesthesia, Critical care and Pain Medicine, 5 th Floor Teaching Block, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India. E-mail: neisevilie@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                SJA-11-254
                10.4103/1658-354X.203058
                5389260
                872f7f07-22a9-4077-b82c-8f1bd2d8060e
                Copyright: © 2017 Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

                History
                Categories
                Letters to Editor

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                Anesthesiology & Pain management

                Comments

                Comment on this article