Purpose: Silveira et al (2020) described a new device that aims to facilitate submental intubation. This study aimed to verify the clinical complications from using this new device for submental endotracheal compared to the conventional technique.
Material and methods: Patients who underwent submental intubation with the orotracheal tube transposition device were compared to those who underwent the conventional technique in a prospective cohort study. The primary predictor variable was intubation technique: conventional versus device-assisted. The primary outcome was total complications (all complications trans and postoperative, were recorded). Secondary variables were 1) age, 2) sex, 3) etiology, 4) race/ethnicity, 5) fracture types, and 6) intubation procedure time. The data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Differences were considered statistically significant at P < .05.
Results: Forty-two cases are described, including 24 cases with the device and 18 cases using the conventional technique. The mean age was 30.5 ± 11.228 years. The majority of patients were of male sex (88%), non-white (64%), and victims of motorcycle accidents (33%). The mean time to perform submental intubation was 9.9 minutes (±2.1293). Nine complications were recorded, including 2 intraoperative (2 tube dislocations) and 7 postoperative (5 unesthetic scars, one localized hematoma, and one skin infection). The technique used did not affect the time to submental intubation (P = .610). There was no association between technique and occurrence of intraoperative (P = .679; RR = 0.75; confidence interval [CI], 0.05-11.2), postoperative (P = .656; RR = 1.000; CI, 0.255-3.922), or total complications (P = .602; RR = 0.938; CI, 0.293-3.003).
Conclusion: The new device proposed seems to be a good option with similar complication rates as compared to conventional submental intubation.
Copyright © 2022 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.