Originally posted on MEDEST:
62 yrs old male found unconscious GCS 6 (E1,V1, P4). Sign of vomiting and inhalation. Profoundly hypoxic, hypertensive (BP 200 over 110). Pupils were miotic with anisocoria dx>sx.
The team, after aspiration of gastric material from the airway, decided for airway control, before transport. The patient is overweight with a “taurine” neck so VL was chosen as first choice for airway management.
RSI (Fentanyl. Midazolam, Sux) performed. In the video you can see a detailed explanation of the VL technique that is slightly different from DL technique.
Post-intubation management included ventilation optimization (EtCO2 35-38 mmHg in suspected intracranial hypertension) oxygenation and haemodynamic management.
Movie captures the important lessons of a simulation session based upon using a rigid suction catheter (Yankauer and other variant) to decontaminate the airway of a modified Laerdal Difficult Airway Simulator mannequin. The technique described in this simulation is known as the “SALAD” technique–Suction Assisted Laryngoscopy Airway Decontamination.
The central tenant of the SALAD technique is to make the rigid suction catheter the “tent-pole” of airway management–the suction catheter is utilized in all phases of laryngoscopy to facilitate the quick and proper placement of the laryngoscope blade on the first pass attempt, in lieu of older methods such as opening the patient’s mouth with a scissor-type gesture of the right forefinger and thumb. The result is speed and efficiency coupled with the ability to decontaminate the airway during routine and emergency airway management. In this same manner, the SALAD method can facilitate the insertion of Supraglottic Airways as well, including the Laryngeal Tube. Modern suction catheters beyond standard hospital-issued Yankauer suctions are discussed and demonstrated as well as portable suction systems are demonstrated.
Originally posted on The Collective:
One of the good things about research that has its own issues, is that there is lots of scope to learn from the things about it that are good, as well as those that aren’t so great. The nice thing about ongoing comment is it gives even more chances to explain why a researcher might make certain choices along the way. Every question in research has more than one way of approaching some answers. Dr Alan Garner returns to provide even more background on this particular study, which has already generated some interesting conversation and a follow-up post.
It’s an excellent thing to be able to keep having discussion around the challenges related to both conducting and interpreting a trial. These things always bring up so many valuable questions, which deserve a response. So this is not going to be quick, but I hope you’ll have a read.
View original 1,932 more words