Research Article

Comparison of different predictive tests for difficult airways in pediatrics

Volume: 10 Number: 3 December 30, 2020
EN

Comparison of different predictive tests for difficult airways in pediatrics

Abstract

Objective: There are few studies regarding the use of predictive tests for difficult airways in pediatrics. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of the modified Mallampati test (MMT), the upper lip bite test (ULBT) and anthropometric measurements of the head and neck in the prediction of difficult airways in children. Methods: Forty-eight pediatric patients who underwent elective surgery under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation were recruited for the study. During the preanesthetic evaluation, airway status was evaluated using three methods: MMT, ULBT and anthropometric measurements of the head and neck. Laryngoscopy was performed with a single blade of a videolaryngoscope and airway status was evaluated using the Cormack-Lehane classification. All patients were then classified into two groups: difficult airway or easy airway. Results: Ten (20.8%) patients were classified as the difficult airway group. In this group, 80% of the patients had MMT grade 3-4 (p=0.001) while 50% of the patients were classified as ULBT 3 (p=0.000). Interincisor distance (ID), hyomental distance (HMD), distance from ear tragus to the corner of the mouth (DTM) and distance from frontal plane to chin (DFC) were significantly different between the groups (p<0.05). In ROC curve analysis, ULBT had the largest area under the curve (AUC=0.880). Conclusion: ULBT, MMT, HMD and ID were the most consistent predictors of difficult airway status. ULBT was superior to other tests because of its larger AUC and higher sensitivity and specificity rates. However, difficulty in applicability in young children seemed to be the most important limitation of both ULBT and MMT.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

nil

Project Number

nil

References

  1. 1. Tay CL, Tan GM, Ng SB. Critical incidents in paediatric anaesthesia: an audit of 10 000 anaesthetics in Singapore. Paediatr Anaesth 2001;11:711-8.
  2. 2. Mamie C, Habre W, Delhumeau C, Argiroffo CB, Morabia A. Incidence and risk factors of perioperative respiratory adverse events in children undergoing elective surgery. Paediatr Anaesth 2004;14:218-24.
  3. 3. Weiss M, Engelhardt T. Proposal for the management of the unexpected difficult pediatric airway. Paediatr Anaesth 2010;20:454-64.
  4. 4. Samsoon GL, Young JR. Difficult tracheal intubation: a retrospective study. Anaesthesia 1987;42:487-90.
  5. 5. Salimi A, Farzanegan B, Rastegarpour A, Kolahi AA. Comparison of the upper lip bite test with measurement of thyromental distance for prediction of difficult intubations. Acta Anaesthesiol Taiwan 2008;46:61-5.
  6. 6. Min JJ, Kim G, Kim E, Lee JH. The diagnostic validity of clinical airway assessments for predicting difficult laryngoscopy using a grey zone approach. J Int Med Res 2016;44:893-904.
  7. 7. Tokmakoğlu M, Çağlar S, Ünlü S. The comparison of Mallampati and Cormack-Lehane test in prediction of difficult intubation in children. [Article in Turkish] T Clin J Med Sci 2002;22:484-6.
  8. 8. Nikhar SA, Grover VK, Mathew PJ. Predictors of intubation in children. Indian J Pediatr 2010;77:1392-4.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Otorhinolaryngology

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

December 30, 2020

Submission Date

November 24, 2020

Acceptance Date

December 26, 2020

Published in Issue

Year 1970 Volume: 10 Number: 3

APA
Kılıç, Y., Onay, M., Ceyhan, D., Bilir, A., & Yelken, B. (2020). Comparison of different predictive tests for difficult airways in pediatrics. ENT Updates, 10(3), 402-408. https://doi.org/10.32448/entupdates.830458
AMA
1.Kılıç Y, Onay M, Ceyhan D, Bilir A, Yelken B. Comparison of different predictive tests for difficult airways in pediatrics. ENT Updates. 2020;10(3):402-408. doi:10.32448/entupdates.830458
Chicago
Kılıç, Yeliz, Meryem Onay, Dilek Ceyhan, Ayten Bilir, and Birgül Yelken. 2020. “Comparison of Different Predictive Tests for Difficult Airways in Pediatrics”. ENT Updates 10 (3): 402-8. https://doi.org/10.32448/entupdates.830458.
EndNote
Kılıç Y, Onay M, Ceyhan D, Bilir A, Yelken B (December 1, 2020) Comparison of different predictive tests for difficult airways in pediatrics. ENT Updates 10 3 402–408.
IEEE
[1]Y. Kılıç, M. Onay, D. Ceyhan, A. Bilir, and B. Yelken, “Comparison of different predictive tests for difficult airways in pediatrics”, ENT Updates, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 402–408, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.32448/entupdates.830458.
ISNAD
Kılıç, Yeliz - Onay, Meryem - Ceyhan, Dilek - Bilir, Ayten - Yelken, Birgül. “Comparison of Different Predictive Tests for Difficult Airways in Pediatrics”. ENT Updates 10/3 (December 1, 2020): 402-408. https://doi.org/10.32448/entupdates.830458.
JAMA
1.Kılıç Y, Onay M, Ceyhan D, Bilir A, Yelken B. Comparison of different predictive tests for difficult airways in pediatrics. ENT Updates. 2020;10:402–408.
MLA
Kılıç, Yeliz, et al. “Comparison of Different Predictive Tests for Difficult Airways in Pediatrics”. ENT Updates, vol. 10, no. 3, Dec. 2020, pp. 402-8, doi:10.32448/entupdates.830458.
Vancouver
1.Yeliz Kılıç, Meryem Onay, Dilek Ceyhan, Ayten Bilir, Birgül Yelken. Comparison of different predictive tests for difficult airways in pediatrics. ENT Updates. 2020 Dec. 1;10(3):402-8. doi:10.32448/entupdates.830458