Cricoid pressure and the pressor response to tracheal intubation

Effect of Cricoid Pressure Compared With a Sham Procedure in the Rapid Sequence Induction of Anesthesia: The IRIS Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The use of cricoid pressure (Sellick maneuver) during rapid sequence induction (RSI) of anesthesia remains controversial in the absence of a large randomized trial.

Objective

To test the hypothesis that the incidence of pulmonary aspiration is not increased when cricoid pressure is not performed.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial conducted in 10 academic centers. Patients undergoing anesthesia with RSI were enrolled from February 2014 until February 2017 and followed up for 28 days or until hospital discharge (last follow-up, February 8, 2017).

Interventions

Patients were assigned to a cricoid pressure (Sellick group) or a sham procedure group.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary end point was the incidence of pulmonary aspiration (at the glottis level during laryngoscopy or by tracheal aspiration after intubation). It was hypothesized that the sham procedure would not be inferior to the cricoid pressure. The secondary end points were related to pulmonary aspiration, difficult tracheal intubation, and traumatic complications owing to the tracheal intubation or cricoid pressure.

Results

Of 3472 patients randomized, mean (SD) age was 51 (19) years and 1777 (51%) were men. The primary end point, pulmonary aspiration, occurred in 10 patients (0.6%) in the Sellick group and in 9 patients (0.5%) in the sham group. The upper limit of the 1-sided 95% CI of relative risk was 2.00, exceeding 1.50, failing to demonstrate noninferiority (P = .14). The risk difference was -0.06% (2-sided 95% CI, -0.57 to 0.42) in the intent-to-treat population and -0.06% (2-sided 95% CI, -0.56 to 0.43) in the per protocol population. Secondary end points were not significantly different among the 2 groups (pneumonia, length of stay, and mortality), although the comparison of the Cormack and Lehane grade (Grades 3 and 4, 10% vs 5%; P <.001) and the longer intubation time (Intubation time >30 seconds, 47% vs 40%; P <.001) suggest an increased difficulty of tracheal intubation in the Sellick group.

Conclusions and Relevance

This large randomized clinical trial performed in patients undergoing anesthesia with RSI failed to demonstrate the noninferiority of the sham procedure in preventing pulmonary aspiration. Further studies are required in pregnant women and outside the operating room.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02080754.

Effectiveness and risks of cricoid pressure during rapid sequence induction for endotracheal intubation

BACKGROUND

Rapid sequence induction (RSI) for endotracheal intubation is a technique widely used in anaesthesia, emergency and intensive care medicine to secure an airway in patients deemed at risk of pulmonary aspiration. Cricoid pressure is conceptually used to reduce the risk of aspiration by compressing the oesophagus.

OBJECTIVES

To identify and evaluate all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving participants undergoing elective or emergency airway management via RSI and compare participants who have cricoid pressure administered with participants who do not have cricoid pressure administered.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 4), MEDLINE via OvidSP (1946 to May 2015), EMBASE via OvidSP (1980 to May 2015), ISI Web of Science (from 1940 to May 2015) and CINAHL via EBSCOhost (1982 to May 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all RCTs comparing people undergoing RSI who have cricoid pressure applied, either intermittently or continuously, with people undergoing RSI who do not have cricoid pressure applied in the context of endotracheal intubation using a direct laryngoscopic technique. We included both elective and emergency cases. We included studies of blinded and unblinded participants. Participants (male or female) were involved in any type of procedure where general anaesthetic utilizing RSI or emergency airway management utilizing RSI and endotracheal intubation was undertaken. We expected the control arm to be the absence of cricoid pressure at any stage during RSI. The primary outcome of interest was the reported event rate or prevalence of aspiration determined by a) documented gastric aspiration determined by visual inspection of aspirated stomach contents on laryngoscopy; b) pepsin detection in tracheal aspirate using the Ufberg method; c) post-anaesthetic radiographic changes suggestive of aspiration pneumonitis or d) any combination of a to c. Secondary outcomes of interest included documented impaired visualization of the airway by a treating laryngoscopist, force applied during cricoid pressure, the direction of application of force of applied cricoid pressure, independent risk factors for aspiration and whether the person applying cricoid pressure had previously done so in an emergency airway context.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of all the studies obtained from the search using recognition of words such as 'cricoid pressure', 'rapid sequence intubation', 'emergency airway management' and 'aspiration'. Two authors independently determined the study inclusion by using a study eligibility form that we developed for the purpose of this review. We also reported the decisions regarding inclusion and exclusion in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. We assumed that studies that did not describe the use of RSI in their title, abstract or methodology used an alternative method of anaesthetic induction or emergency airway management and thus we excluded them. Data extracted from included studies comprised study characteristics, participant demographics, intervention and comparison details plus outcome measures and results. We contacted primary authors of studies with missing or unreported but potentially relevant data to obtain missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 493 records that we identified from databases as a result of the search (excluding duplicates), we regarded 70 abstracts/titles as potentially relevant studies. Independent scrutiny of these 70 titles and abstracts identified 29 potentially relevant studies. Of the 29 potentially relevant studies, one study met the criteria for inclusion. This study was a RCT that compared participants undergoing RSI and endotracheal intubation in the context of elective surgery requiring a general anaesthetic. Forty participants were recruited, 20 of whom had cricoid pressure applied and 20 of whom had cricoid pressure simulated. The main outcomes reported were systolic arterial pressure and heart rate after laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation. We did not consider these outcomes relevant for the purposes of this systematic review. The search also identified one study that could potentially be included in an updated systematic review in the future, but was at the time of the search a proposal for a trial only and had no reported outcomes at this time.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no information available from published RCTs on clinically relevant outcome measures with respect to the application of cricoid pressure during RSI in the context of endotracheal intubation. On the basis of the findings of non-RCT literature, however, cricoid pressure may not be necessary to undertake RSI safely, and therefore well-designed and conducted RCTs should nonetheless be encouraged to properly assess the safety and effectiveness of cricoid pressure.

Cricoid pressure and laryngeal manipulation in 402 pre-hospital emergency anaesthetics: essential safety measure or a hindrance to rapid safe intubation?

OBJECTIVES

This is the first study to look at the effects of cricoid pressure/laryngeal manipulation on the laryngeal view and intubation success in the emergency or pre-hospital environment. Cricoid pressure is applied in the hope of reducing the incidence of aspiration. However the technique has never been evaluated in a randomized trial and may adversely affect laryngeal view. In order to improve intubating conditions cricoid pressure may be released and the larynx manipulated into a more favourable position.

METHODS

We carried out a prospective observational study to evaluate the effects of cricoid pressure and laryngeal manipulation on laryngeal view in our physician led pre-hospital trauma service.

RESULTS

402 patients were included over a 16-month period. We intubated 98.8% patients on the first or second attempt. In 61 intubations (in 55 patients, 13.6%) the larynx required manipulation to facilitate intubation. In 22 intubations cricoid pressure was removed with the laryngeal view improving in 50%. Bimanual laryngeal manipulation was used in 25 intubations and the larynx better visualised in 60% of these. Backwards upwards rightwards pressure was applied to the larynx in 14 intubations and the laryngeal view improved in 64%. Two patients regurgitated when cricoid pressure was released. Both had prolonged periods of bag valve mask ventilation and difficult intubations.

DISCUSSION

The results suggest that cricoid pressure should be removed if the laryngeal view obtained is not sufficient to allow immediate intubation. Further manipulation of the larynx is likely to improve the chances of successful tracheal tube placement.

Cricoid Pressure in Emergency Department Rapid Sequence Tracheal Intubations: A Risk-Benefit Analysis

Cricoid pressure is considered an integral part of patient safety in rapid sequence tracheal intubation and emergency airway management. Cricoid pressure is applied to prevent the regurgitation of gastric contents into the pharynx and subsequent aspiration into the pulmonary tree. This review analyzes the published evidence supporting cricoid pressure, along with potential problems, including increased difficulty with tracheal intubation and ventilation. According to the evidence available, the universal and continuous application of cricoid pressure during emergency airway management is questioned. An awareness of the benefits and potential problems with technique allows the practitioner to better judge when cricoid pressure should be used and instances in which it should be removed.

The pressor response and airway effects of cricoid pressure during induction of general anesthesia

Cricoid pressure (CP) has been used to protect the patient from regurgitation and gastric insufflation. Because the hemodynamic effects of CP have not been evaluated independently, we designed this prospective study. Eighty ASA I adult patients were prospectively included in the study. Patients were randomly divided into Cricoid and Placebo groups. In the Cricoid group, after the induction of anesthesia, bimanual CP was performed, and in the Control group, simple placement of hands without exerting pressure was performed. Peak inspiratory pressure and exhaled tidal volume were recorded before and during the application of CP. Arterial blood pressure and heart rate were recorded before and after application of CP. The data were compared between and within groups by using the mixed-design analysis of variance. Peak inspiratory pressure increased and tidal volume decreased significantly after the application of CP compared with the Control group and baseline values. Arterial blood pressure and heart rate increased significantly after the application of CP compared with the baseline values and with those of the Control group. The result of this study shows that CP can cause a relatively strong pressor response.

Cricoid pressure

PURPOSE

Although cricoid pressure (CP) is a superficially simple and appropriate mechanical method to protect the patient from regurgitation and gastric insufflation, in practice it is a complex manoeuvre which is difficult to perform optimally. The purpose of this review is to examine and evaluate studies on the application of (CP). It deals with anatomical and physiological considerations, techniques employed, safety and efficacy issues and the impact of CP on airway management with special mention of the laryngeal mask airway. SOURCE OF MATERIAL: Three medical databases (48 Hours, Medline, and Reference Manager Update) were searched for citations containing key words, subject headings and text entries on CP to October 1996.

PRINCIPLE FINDINGS

There have been no studies proving that CP is beneficial, yet there is evidence that it is often ineffective and that it may increase the risk of failed intubation and regurgitation. After evaluation of all available data, potential guidelines are suggested for optimal use of CP in routine and complex situations.

CONCLUSIONS

If CP is to remain standard practice during induction of anaesthesia, it must be shown to be safe and effective. Meanwhile, further understanding of its advantages and limitations, improved training in its use, and guidelines on optimal force and method of application should lead to better patient care.

Timing of peak pressor response following endotracheal intubation

The study was designed to measure the timing of the peak cardiovascular response following laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. Thirty patients ASA 1 or 2 were studied, with arterial pressure being continuously monitored using the Ohmeda 2300 Finapres. Patients were randomised to receive either propofol 2.5 mg.kg-1 (Group A) or thiopentone 4.5 mg.kg-1 (Group B). The mean time to complete laryngoscopy and intubation was 26 s in Group A and 20 s in Group B. The peak response occurred on average 31 s after the start of the stimulus in Group A and after 32 s in Group B. In 8 out of the 30 cases the peak response occurred during the period of stimulation. Systolic pressure fell on average by 2.6 kPa (20 mmHg) (range 0 to 5.9 (45 mmHg)) from its peak value to the value measured at the 1-min time mark in the propofol group, and by 2.3 kPa (17 mmHg) (range 0.4 (3 mmHg) to 3.8 (29 mmHg)) in the thiopentone group. We conclude that the use of slow arm-cuff-based arterial pressure measurement techniques may miss important hypertensive episodes during laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. The effectiveness of agents in obtunding the pressor response may thus be misinterpreted.