-
Respiratory Care Feb 2022Artificial airway suctioning is a key component of airway management and a core skill for clinicians charged with assuring airway patency. Suctioning of the artificial...
Artificial airway suctioning is a key component of airway management and a core skill for clinicians charged with assuring airway patency. Suctioning of the artificial airway is a common procedure performed worldwide on a daily basis. As such, it is imperative that clinicians are familiar with the most-effective and efficient methods to perform the procedure. We conducted a systematic review to assist in the development of evidence-based recommendations that pertain to the care of patients with artificial airways. From our systematic review, we developed guidelines and recommendations that addressed questions related to the indications, complications, timing, duration, and methods of artificial airway suctioning. By using a modified version of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method, the following recommendations for suctioning were developed for neonatal, pediatric, and adult patients with an artificial airway: (1) breath sounds, visual secretions in the artificial airway, and a sawtooth pattern on the ventilator waveform are indicators for suctioning pediatric and adult patients, and an acute increase in airway resistance may be an indicator for suctioning in neonates; (2) as-needed only, rather than scheduled, suctioning is sufficient for neonatal and pediatric patients; (3) both closed and open suction systems may be used to safely and effectively remove secretions from the artificial airway of adult patients; (4) preoxygenation should be performed before suctioning in pediatric and adult patients; (5) the use of normal saline solution should generally be avoided during suctioning; (6) during open suctioning, sterile technique should be used; (7) suction catheters should occlude < 70% of the endotracheal tube lumen in neonates and < 50% in pediatric and adult patients, and suction pressure should be kept below -120 mm Hg in neonatal and pediatric patients and -200 mm Hg in adult patients; (8) suction should be applied for a maximum of 15 s per suctioning procedure; (9) deep suctioning should only be used when shallow suctioning is ineffective; (10) routine bronchoscopy for secretion removal is not recommended; and (11) devices used to clear endotracheal tubes may be used when airway resistance is increased due to secretion accumulation.
Topics: Adult; Airway Management; Child; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Intubation, Intratracheal; Respiration, Artificial; Suction; Ventilators, Mechanical
PubMed: 35078900
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.09548 -
Respiratory Care Aug 2019Airway management techniques are aimed at reducing complications associated with artificial airways and mechanical ventilation, such as retained secretions. The impact... (Review)
Review
Airway management techniques are aimed at reducing complications associated with artificial airways and mechanical ventilation, such as retained secretions. The impact of airway management techniques on ventilator-associated events (VAEs) varies considerably by modality. Closed-suction techniques are generally recommended but have limited, if any, impact on VAEs. Normal saline instillation during suctioning is not recommended. Devices designed specifically to remove biofilm from the inside of endotracheal tubes appear to be safe, but their role in VAE prevention is uncertain. Subglottic secretion clearance by artificial cough maneuvers is promising, but more research is needed to assess its clinical feasibility. Continuous cuff-pressure management appears to be effective in reducing microaspiration of subglottic secretions.
Topics: Airway Management; Humans; Iatrogenic Disease; Intubation, Intratracheal; Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated; Respiration, Artificial; Suction; Ventilators, Mechanical
PubMed: 31346073
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.07107 -
Respiratory Care May 2021In mechanically ventilated subjects, intra-tracheal secretions can be aspirated with either open suction systems (OSS) or closed suction systems (CSS). In contrast to... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
In mechanically ventilated subjects, intra-tracheal secretions can be aspirated with either open suction systems (OSS) or closed suction systems (CSS). In contrast to CSS, conventional OSS require temporarily disconnecting the patient from the ventilator, which briefly diminishes PEEP and oxygen supply. On the other hand, CSS are more expensive and less effective at aspirating secretions. Thus, it was hypothesized that the 2 procedures differentially affect pulmonary and cardiovascular parameters after suction.
METHODS
Subjects in the ICU ( = 66) were quasi-randomized for initial treatment with OSS or CSS in a crossover design. To compare the potential for these suction systems to compromise cardiorespiratory stability, changes in cardiopulmonary physiology were assessed from before to just after use of each suction system (three 10-s aspirations).
RESULTS
For most pulmonary and cardiovascular parameters (ie, peak inspiratory pressure, airway resistance, pressure plateau, heart rate, and arterial pressures), the effects of aspiration inversely correlated with baseline values for that parameter, with a similar regression slope between suction systems. However, when controlling for baseline values, OSS caused significantly greater increases in airway resistance and peak inspiratory pressure ( < .001 and < .01 vs CSS, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Elevated airway resistance prior to endotracheal suction may justify use of a CSS and contraindicate a conventional OSS in mechanically ventilated subjects. Adoption of this approach into clinical guidelines may prevent suction-induced pulmonary injury in subjects, especially for those with underlying diseases involving increased airway resistance or increased alveolar pressure. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03256214.).
Topics: Humans; Intubation, Intratracheal; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Physiological Phenomena; Suction; Trachea
PubMed: 33688090
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.08511 -
Chest Jul 2020
Topics: Gravitation; Humans; Suction; Thoracentesis
PubMed: 32654717
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.02.028 -
Laryngo- Rhino- Otologie Feb 2022
Topics: Drainage; Humans; Suction
PubMed: 35098509
DOI: 10.1055/a-1671-6301 -
Ugeskrift For Laeger Aug 2023Morel-Lavallée lesion (MLL) is a closed degloving injury caused by traumatic sheering of subcutaneous tissue from the underlying fascia. MLL can be classified as acute... (Review)
Review
Morel-Lavallée lesion (MLL) is a closed degloving injury caused by traumatic sheering of subcutaneous tissue from the underlying fascia. MLL can be classified as acute (less-than 3 months) or chronic (greater-than 3 months or if a capsule has formed). Acute lesions are treated with compression, percutaneous aspiration, sclerodesis, suction-curettage or open surgery depending on vitality of the overlying skin, if fractures are present next to the lesion or if infection has occurred. Chronic lesions are treated with sclerodesis, suction-curettage or open surgery. Drain and vacuum-assisted closure placement should be used post-operatively, as argued in this review.
Topics: Humans; Fractures, Bone; Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy; Skin; Subcutaneous Tissue; Suction
PubMed: 37615228
DOI: No ID Found -
Medicine Jan 2024Thoracentesis is performed by 4 methods: gravity, manual aspiration, vacuum-bottle suction, and wall suction. This literature review investigates the safety of these... (Review)
Review
Thoracentesis is performed by 4 methods: gravity, manual aspiration, vacuum-bottle suction, and wall suction. This literature review investigates the safety of these techniques and determines if there is significant difference in complication rates. A comprehensive literature search revealed 6 articles studying thoracentesis techniques and their complication rates, reviewing 20,815 thoracenteses: 80 (0.4%) by gravity, 9431 (45.3%) by manual aspiration, 3498 (16.8%) by vacuum-bottle suction, 7580 (36.4%) by wall suction and 226 (1.1%) unspecified. Of the 6 studies, 2 were smaller with 100 and 140 patients respectively. Overall, there was a 4.4% complication rate including hemothoraces, pneumothoraces, re-expansion pulmonary edema (REPE), chest discomfort, bleeding at the site, pain, and vasovagal episodes. The pneumothorax and REPE rate was 2.5%. Sub-analyzed by each method, there was a 47.5% (38/80) complication rate in the gravity group, 1.2% (115/9431) in the manual aspiration group including 0.7% pneumothorax or REPE, 8% (285/3498) in the vacuum-bottle group including 3.7% pneumothorax or REPE, 4% (309/7580) in the wall suction group all of which were either pneumothorax or REPE, and 73% (166/226) in the unspecified group most of which were vasovagal episodes. Procedure duration was less in the suction groups versus gravity drainage. The 2 smaller studies indicated that in the vacuum groups, early procedure termination rate from respiratory failure was significantly higher than non-vacuum techniques. Significant complication rate from thoracentesis by any technique is low. Suction drainage was noted to have a lower procedure time. Symptom-limited thoracentesis is safe using vacuum or wall suction even with large volumes drained. Other factors such as procedure duration, quantity of fluid removed, number of needle passes, patients' BMI, and operator technique may have more of an impact on complication rate than drainage modality. All suction modalities of drainage seem to be safe. Operator technique, attention to symptom development, amount of fluid removed, and intrapleural pressure changes may be important in predicting complication development, and therefore, may be useful in choosing which technique to employ. Specific drainage modes and their complications need to be further studied.
Topics: Humans; Thoracentesis; Pneumothorax; Thoracic Surgical Procedures; Drainage; Suction; Pulmonary Edema; Respiratory Aspiration
PubMed: 38181250
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000036850 -
Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin... Mar 2021
Topics: Humans; Intubation, Intratracheal; Respiration, Artificial; Suction; Trachea
PubMed: 33095313
DOI: 10.1007/s00063-020-00746-4 -
Current Urology Reports Sep 2020Equipment used in endourology is constantly evolving due to increasing incidence of urolithiasis. Suctioning has been used mainly in PCNL in conjunction with ultrasonic... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Equipment used in endourology is constantly evolving due to increasing incidence of urolithiasis. Suctioning has been used mainly in PCNL in conjunction with ultrasonic and ballistic devices for stone removal. Recently technological advances permitted the use of suctioning in more endourological techniques. This review aims to summarize the literature regarding these advancements and analyze the upcoming results.
RECENT FINDINGS
Several centers have conducted experimental and clinical studies on suctioning use during PCNL, mPCNL, and ureteroscopy and concluded that it is an effective and safe adjustment that improves stone-free rates and limits complication rates after these procedures. Suctioning use during common endourological procedures led to improved safety and efficacy among several indications. Due to the observational nature and small sample size of many studies, larger RCTs are needed to make safe conclusions.
Topics: Animals; Disease Models, Animal; Humans; Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous; Suction; Treatment Outcome; Ureteroscopy; Urolithiasis
PubMed: 32915324
DOI: 10.1007/s11934-020-00998-9 -
Journal of the European Academy of... Feb 2022
Topics: Genitalia; Humans; Purpura; Suction
PubMed: 34487607
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.17644