Application of dexmedetomidine combined with fibreoptic bronchoscope for tracheal intubation in difficult airways caused by huge goiter

Xin-bai LI,Huan-qiu LIU,Xian-ying MENG,Tong YUAN,Wei HAN,Ti TONG,Hai-chun MA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13481/j.1671-587x.2012.02.051

2012-01-01

Abstract:Objective: To study the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine combined with fibreoptic bronchoscope for tracheal intubation in difficult airways caused by huge goiter. Methods: Thirty patients with anticipated difficult airways caused by huge goiter were enrolled and randomly divided into dexmedetomidine group (n=15) and propofol group (n=15). The patients in dexmedetomidine group received a loading dose of dexmedetomidine (1.0 μg·kg -1), infused over 10 min, then pumped at continuous rate of 0.4 μg·kg -1·h -1. The patients in propofol group received a loading dose of 2.0 mg·kg -1 and pumped at continuous rate of 5-8 mg·kg -1·h -1. The intubating conditions were graded by a scoring system; the reactions to intubation such as coughing and patient tolerance were observed; the heart rates and mean arterial blood pressures (MABP) at different time points of baseline(T0), Rassay score 4(T1), intubating(T2) , 1 min after intubation (T3) and 3 min after intubation (T4) were recorded; adverse events and haemodynamic support were observed. Results: All the patients in two groups were performed successfully with fibreoptic intubation. The patients in dexmedetomidine group could keep better spontaneous breathing without respiratory depression, and were able to command and cooperate tracheal intubation, while in propofol group 11 patients (73.3%) could not cooperate tracheal intubation (P<0.05). With respect to intubation scores in propofol group, there were 7 cases of vocal cord opening and 3 cases of vocal cord movement; while in dexmedetomidine group, there were 12 cases in vocal cord opening and 3 cases in vocal cord moving. Compared with propofol group, the patients in dexmedetomidine group had more favorable intubation scores of vocal cord movement (P<0.05). With respect to no reaction or slight grimacing of reaction to intubation comfort score, there were 8 cases in propofol group and 12 cases in dexmedetomidine group, and there was significant difference (P<0.05). The patients in dexmedetomidine group experienced fewer airway events and less heart rate response to intubation than those in propofol group (P<0.05). Conclusion: Compared with propofol in management of difficult airways caused by huge goiter, dexmedetomidine has better tolerance, and preserves a patient airway, and has more stable haemodynamic response to intubation.