+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Devices for lung isolation used by anesthesiologists with limited thoracic experience: comparison of double-lumen endotracheal tube, Univent torque control blocker, and Arndt wire-guided endobronchial blocker



Devices for lung isolation used by anesthesiologists with limited thoracic experience: comparison of double-lumen endotracheal tube, Univent torque control blocker, and Arndt wire-guided endobronchial blocker



Anesthesiology 104(2): 261-6 Discussion 5a



Lung isolation is accomplished with a double-lumen tube or a bronchial blocker. Previous studies comparing lung isolation methods were performed by experienced anesthesiologists in thoracic anesthesia. Therefore, the results of these studies may not be relevant to the anesthesiologist with limited experience. This study compared the success rates of lung isolation devices among anesthesiologists with limited experience in thoracic anesthesia. A prospective, randomized trial was designed to determine the success and time required for proper placement of the left-sided double-lumen tube (n = 22), the Univent tube (Vitaid Ltd., Lewiston, NY; n = 22), and the Arndt Blocker (Cook Critical Care, Bloomington, IN; n = 22). Anesthesiologists with less than two lung isolation cases per month were included (faculty n = 17 and senior residents n = 11). Variables recorded included (1) successful placement (as determined by an independent observer), (2) time of placement, and (3) the number of times the fiberoptic bronchoscope was used. Participants failed to place or position their assigned device in 25 of 66 patients (failure was 39% among faculty and 36% among senior residents). The failure rate did not differ among the three devices (P = 0.65). The median (25th-75th percentile) times to complete the placement procedures were as follows: (1) double-lumen tube: 6.1 min (4.6-9.5 min), (2) Univent tube: 6.7 min (4.9-8.8 min), and (3) Arndt Blocker: 8.6 min (5.8-17.5 min) (P = 0.45 comparing all devices). After device malposition was identified, it took 1 min or less for the investigating anesthesiologist to achieve optimal position. Anesthesiologists with limited experience in thoracic anesthesia frequently fail to successfully place lung isolation devices. Rapid successful device placement by an experienced anesthesiologist excluded any contribution of uniquely difficult anatomy. The nature of the malpositions suggests that the most critical factor in successful placement was the anesthesiologist's knowledge of endoscopic bronchial anatomy.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 048766311

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 16436844


Related references

Lung Separation during Thoracic Surgery Arndt Endobronchial Blocker Versus Double-Lumen Endotracheal Tube. Anesthesiology Abstracts of Scientific Papers Annual Meeting ( ): Abstract No A-1316, 2002

Comparison of the double-lumen endotracheal tube and the Arndt bronchial blocker used by inexperienced anesthesiologists in right- and left-sided thoracic surgery. Revista Espanola de Anestesiologia Y Reanimacion 54(10): 602-607, 2007

A comparison of double-lumen endotracheal tube with univent blocker and bronchial blocker during thoracic surgical anesthesia. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 92(35): 2481-2484, 2012

Lung isolation in the morbidly obese patient: a comparison of a left-sided double-lumen tracheal tube with the Arndt® wire-guided blocker. British Journal of Anaesthesia 109(4): 630-635, 2012

The wire-guided endobronchial blocker as a solution to provide one-lung ventilation when a double-lumen endotracheal tube is malpositioned. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 17(5): 636-637, 2003

Comparison of Arndt-endobronchial blocker plus laryngeal mask airway with left-sided double-lumen endobronchial tube in one-lung ventilation in thoracic surgery in the morbidly obese. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research 51(2): E6825, 2017

A comparison of double-lumen endotracheal tube and Arndt bronchial blocker in right and left thoracic surgery. European Journal of Anaesthesiology 23(Suppl. 37): 73-74, 2006

A Comparison of a Left-Sided Broncho-Cath?? with the Torque Control Blocker Univent and the Wire-Guided Blocker. Anesthesia & Analgesia 96(1): 283-289, 2003

A comparison of a left-sided Broncho-Cath(R) with the torque control blocker Univent and the wire-guided blocker. Anesthesia and Analgesia 96(1): 283-289, 2003

A comparison of a left-sided Broncho-Cath with the torque control blocker univent and the wire-guided blocker. Anesthesia and Analgesia 96(1): 283-9 Table of Contents, 2003

Failure of lung isolation by a double-lumen endotracheal tube rescued by the concomitant use of an arndt bronchial blocker under direct visualization. A and a Case Reports 1(2): 37-38, 2013

A comparison of the deflecting-tip bronchial blocker with a wire-guided blocker or left-sided double-lumen tube. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 23(4): 501-505, 2009

A comparison of the Arndt endobronchial blocker with a double lumen tube in robotic cardiac surgery. Anasthesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin, Schmerztherapie 39(6): 353-359, 2004

Lung isolation during port-access cardiac surgery: double-lumen endotracheal tube versus single-lumen endotracheal tube with a bronchial blocker. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 17(6): 725-727, 2003

Successful Use of a Double Lumen Endotracheal Tube and Bronchial Blocker for Lung Isolation in Pulmonary Mucormycosis. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 33(3): 776-780, 2019