Predicting efficiency of post-induction mask ventilation based on demographic and anatomical factors

Authors
Mahmoud Saghaei
Hamid Shetabi
Mohammad Golparvar
Department of Anesthesia, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract
Background: Failure to ventilate patients by mask leads to serious complications especially if associated with difficult intubation. Previous studies have used subjective and indirect measures to evaluate difficulty in mask ventilation, which are associated with high inter-observer discrepancies. In this study, we have defined and used efficiency of mask ventilation (EMV) as an objective and direct surrogate for ease of mask ventilation in patients undergoing GA and mask ventilation using neuromuscular relaxation.
Materials and Methods: 1050 adult patients prospectively were evaluated with respect to different patients demographic and physical factors and EMV. EMV was defined as the ratio of minute ventilation via anesthesia mask to that via tracheal tube expressed as percentage. Edentolous patients were ventilated using lip-over-mask techniques. Separate analyses were done for edentolous and non-edentolous patients.
Results: EMV in edentolous patients (n=269) using the lip-over-mask method was relatively high (90.9 ± 14.3%, 60.14-128.57 range). The result of multiple regression analysis in patients with normal denture determined receded chin, presence of beard, male gender, high Mallampati classes, high neck circumference, low inter-incisors gap, and old age as independent factors for estimating EMV. A regression formula for predicting EMV was developed which had an acceptable R-square value with a good model fit.
Conclusions: Using EMV is an easy and reliable tool for measuring efficiency of mask ventilation. Based on the result of this study, EMV can be estimated from patient's demographic and physical factors. In edentolous patients, using the lip-over-mask method results in adequate ventilation of lungs.

Keywords

1. American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: An updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Anesthesiology 2003;98:1269-77.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2. Peterson GN, Domino KB, Caplan RA, Posner KL, Lee LA, Cheney FW. Management of the Difficult Airway: A closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology 2005;103:33-9.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3. Asai T, Koga k, Vaughan RS. Respiratory complications associated with tracheal intubation and extubation. Br J Anaesth 1998;80:767-75.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4. Kheterpal S, Han R, Tremper KK, Shanks A, Tait AR, O'Reilly M, et al. Incidence and predictors of difficult and impossible mask ventilation. Anesthesiology 2006;105:885-91.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5. Langeron O, Masso E, Huraux C, Guggiari M, Bianchi A, Coriat P, et al. Prediction of difficult mask ventilation. Anesthesiology 2000;92:1229-36.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6. Yildiz TS, Solak M, Toker K. The incidence and risk factors of difficult mask ventilation. J Anaesth 2005;19:7-11.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7. Saghaei M, Safavi MR. Prediction of prolonged laryngoscopy. Anaesthesia 2001;56:1198-201.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8. Khan ZH, Maleki A, Makarem J, Mohammadi M, Khan RH, Zandieh A. A comparison of the upper lip bite test with hyomental/thyrosternal distances and mandible length in predicting difficulty in intubation: A prospective study. Indian J Anaesth 2011;55:43-6.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
9. Rose DK, Cohen MM. The incidence of airway problems depends on the definition used. Can J Anaesth 1996;43:30-4.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev. ed). Hilsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1987. p. 407-44.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11. Racine SX, Solis A, Hamou NA, Letoumelin P, Hepner DL, Beloucif S, et al. Face mask ventilation in edentulous patients: A comparison of mandibular groove and lower lip placement. Anesthesiology 2010;112:1190-3.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12. Han R, Tremper KK, Kheterpal S, O'Reilly M. Grading scale for mask ventilation. Anesthesiology 2004;101:267.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2 nd ed. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988. p. 79-80.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14. R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, 2011, URL Available from: http://www.R-project.org [Last accessed on 2012 Jan 24].  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15. Cormack RS, Lehane J. Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia 1984;39:1105-11.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16. Kil HK, Rooke GA, Ryan-Dykes MA, Bishop MJ. Effect of prophylactic bronchodilator treatment on lung resistance after tracheal intubation. Anesthesiology 1994;81:43-8.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17. Kheterpal S, Martin L, Shanks AM, Tremper KK. Prediction and Outcomes of Impossible Mask Ventilation A Review of 50,000 Anesthetics. Anesthesiology 2009;110:891-7.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18. El-Orbany M, Woehlck HJ. Difficult Mask Ventilation. Anesth Analg 2009;109:1870-80.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
 
Advanced Biomedical Research
Volume 2012, May
May 2012
Pages 1-6