If you wish to respond to a paper or other item already published in the BJA, please go to the abstract/full text version of that item and click on the link "E-Letters: Submit a response to the article".
Electronic Letters to:
|
|
E-letters: Electronic letters published:
-
![[Read E-letter]](/icons/misc/sectionDOWN.gif)
Safety and jet ventilation
- Tim M Cook (1 July 2008)
-
Safety and jet ventilation
- Jean Louis Bourgain, Eric Desruennes ; Marc Fischler ; Patrick Ravussin (19 June 2008)
|
|
|||
|
Tim M Cook Rachel Alexander
Send letter to journal:
|
Major complications during anaesthesia for elective laryngeal surgery in the UK: a national survey of the use of high-pressure source ventilation Dear Editor Many thanks to Drs Bourgain, Desruenne, Fischler, Ravussin for their interest in our article. First we would like to apologise for mis- attributing the statement to the authors. The correct reference was 11 not 1 and it is not a direct quotation.1 We believe our survey is sufficient evidence to raise concerns over the use of transtracheal ventilation using a high pressure source without control of airway pressure, but a survey lacking denominators cannot confirm or refute its lack of safety. In the absence of large randomised controlled trials between techniques, properly designed prospective cohort data collection may be sufficient. It is possible that the 4th National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists 2 which will, from September 2008, prospectively identify major airway complications throughout the United Kingdom, will provide such information. What our survey does illustrate is that the reality in the UK is that in the majority of hospitals transtracheal procedures can only be performed using manual techniques. Assuming these techniques are only used for laryngeal surgery, we conclude that only 15% of respondents performed transtracheal techniques electively and only 7% have access to high frequency jet ventilation. We agree the manual technique is ‘sub- optimal’. However if our experience is typical it is likely that financial pressures prevent purchase of the more expensive equipment and sub-optimal techniques are likely to be the norm in the UK for some time to come. As inferred in our paper we agree that all anaesthetists should be familiar with transtracheal ventilation techniques. Our survey suggests, at least in the UK, that experience is unlikely to be achieved during elective ENT lists. Other solutions are necessary. Tim Cook, Rachel Alexander References 1. Patel A, Randhawa N, Semenov RA. Transtracheal high frequency jet ventilation and iatrogenic injury. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2002; 89: 184 2. http://www.rcoa.ac.uk/index.asp?PageID=1089 (accessed 27 June 2008) Conflict of Interest:None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Jean Louis Bourgain, MD Department of anaesthesia Institut Gustave Roussy Villejuif France, Eric Desruennes ; Marc Fischler ; Patrick Ravussin
Send letter to journal:
|
The paper from Cook and Alexander 1 confirms that practice of jet- ventilation may be dangerous when applied without control of driving pressure and tracheal pressure. However, we would like first to point out that we are not the authors of the following sentence “caution against use of TTJV when ventilation from supraglottic or subglottic catheters can be used, as risk of iatrogenic injury is too high” 2. In fact, our opinion is the exact opposite: laryngeal surgery, and especially laryngeal endoscopy, is optimally performed under transtracheal high frequency jet ventilation. The reason is, as stated by Cook and Alexander, “the main advantage of transtracheal techniques is that it provides the surgeon with operating conditions unhindered by anaesthetic equipment or the need for the surgeon to maintain ventilation”1 . In a nationwide survey on anaesthetic management of laryngeal laser surgery, Cosine K et al did not show any difference between jet ventilation and tracheal intubation but demonstrated that rate of complications was directly related to the number of surgery performed under jet ventilation each year3. In other words, we do well what we do often! Most of laryngeal invasive endoscopic procedures are planned and simply cannot be performed without adequate equipment, particularly a jet-ventilator which automatically cuts off ventilation when end-expiratory pressure exceeds a preset level. A Manujet™ injector is suboptimal. Finally, we want to stress that every anaesthesiologist should be comfortable with transtracheal ventilation/oxygenation since he/she may face one day the cannot ventilate-cannot intubate situation. Laryngeal surgery is thus the ideal field for training in inserting a transtracheal cannula, even more so as this technique offers perfect operative conditions in invasive ENT endoscopic surgery. Furthermore we strongly agree that guidelines and regular training in this particular field is most welcome. References 1. Cook TM, Alexander R. Major complications during anaesthesia for elective laryngeal surgery in the UK: a national survey of the use of high -pressure source ventilation. Br J Anaesth 2008. 2. Bourgain JL, Desruennes E, Fischler M, Ravussin P. Transtracheal high frequency jet ventilation for endoscopic airway surgery: a multicentre study. Br J Anaesth 2001; 87: 870-5. 3. Cozine K, Stone JG, Shulman S, Flaster ER. Ventilatory complications of carbon dioxide laser laryngeal surgery. J Clin Anesth 1991; 3: 20-5. Conflict of Interest:None declared |
|||