Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of alternative techniques of intubation in patients sustaining maxillofacial injuries, where nasotracheal intubation (NTI) is best avoided.
Material And Methods: Alternative techniques to standard naso-tracheal intubation like submental intubation, orotracheal intubation-retrotuberosity/retromolar and missing dentition were used and variables of clinical outcome recorded.
Results: Submental intubation provides an unobstructed intraoral surgical field, avoids intraoperative and postoperative complications of tracheostomy, and overcomes the disadvantages of NTI. In our experience with submental intubation (6 cases), we only had complication related to tube apparatus like damage to pilot balloon. With retrotuberosity intubation (5 cases) we did not encounter any complications and the only limitations were bulbous maxillary tuberosity. Retromolar intubation (4 cases) a safe noninvasive technique has disadvantages like tube interference within the surgical field and not feasible in case of limited retromolar space. Orotracheal-missing dentition intubation (4 cases) is of great advantage i.e. it can be used in cases where NTI is contraindicated, no specialized skill required, no added cost, avoids the need for tracheostomy, no extra-oral procedures required and does not interfere with occlusion/MMF; with disadvantage of occasional tube interference within the surgical field.
Conclusion: Preferred techniques of securing an airway like orotracheal, nasotracheal may not always be applicable, thus a trauma surgeon-anesthesist team should always have alternative techniques in their armamentarium to reduce the morbidity associated with these patients without interference with occlusion, which is prime goal in jaw fracture reduction. We have used these techniques in a country with limited resources and found them equally effective and convenient to use.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4444713 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12663-014-0679-8 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!