Comparison of Ultrasound and Motoyama Formula for Estimation of Endotracheal Tube Diameter in Pediatric Patients

Authors

  • Tasneem Alam Department of Anesthesia, Quetta Institute of Medical Sciences Pakistan
  • Sajjad Qureshi Department of Anesthesia, Quetta Institute of Medical Sciences Pakistan
  • Chaudhry Amjad Ali Department of Anesthesia, Quetta Institute of Medical Sciences Pakistan
  • Akhtar Hussain Department of Anesthesia, Quetta Institute of Medical Sciences Pakistan
  • Kaukab Majeed Department of Anesthesia, Quetta Institute of Medical Sciences Pakistan
  • Awais Qarni Department of Anesthesia, Quetta Institute of Medical Sciences Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v74i6.10269

Keywords:

Endotracheal tube, Motoyama formula, Ultrasonography for ETT

Abstract

Objective: To assess the comparative effectiveness of Ultrasound and Motoyama formula for the calculation of endotracheal tube diameter in pediatric patients.

Study Design: Quasi-experimental study

Place and Duration of Study: The study was carried out at Department of Anesthesia Combined Military Hospital Quetta, Pakistan from May-Nov 2022.

Methodology: The quasi experimental study was carried out at Anesthesia Department of Combined Military hospital Quetta from May to Nov 2022. A sample size of 40 patients was calculated with the aid of WHO sample size calculator. The patients were then divided into two equal groups of 20 patients each. Twenty patients were placed in group-U in which internal diameter of cuffed endotracheal tube was estimated through ultrasonography whereas 20 patients were placed in group-M in which age related Motoyama formula was used as guide to calculate the internal diameter of cuffed endotracheal tube. The intubation attempt was considered successful if tube was passed in first attempt. Statistical Package of Social Science (SPSS) version 26.0 was used to analyze and interpret data.

Results: Both groups were similar in distribution of gender and ASA status. The intubation was successful in first attempt in 19(95%) of group-U patients while only 1(5%) patient had unsuccessful intubation at first attempt. While in group-M patients 13(65%) had successful intubation in first attempt and 7(35%) patients were not intubated at first attempt which showed that the ultrasound guided calculation of tube diameter was superior (p value <0.02). 

Conclusion: The ultrasonographic estimation of endotracheal tube diameter is more reliable as 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Harless J, Ramaiah R, Bhananker SM. Pediatric airway management. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci 2014; 4(1): 65-70. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-5151.128015

Kwon JH, Shin YH, Gil NS, Yeo H, Jeong JS. Analysis of the functionally-narrowest portion of the pediatric upper airway in sedated children. Medicine 2018; 97(27): e11365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011365

Michalek P, Magboul MM, Toker K, Donaldson W, Ozaki M. Advances and controversies in perioperative airway management. BioMed Research Intl 2016; 23(5): 14-19.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/1965623

Tareerath M, Mangmeesri P. Accuracy of age-based formula to predict the size and depth of cuffed oral preformed endotracheal tubes in children undergoing tonsillectomy. Ear, Nose & Throat J 2021; 12(4): 20-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145561320980511

Bennett BL, Scherzer D, Gold D, Buckingham D, McClain A, Hill E, et al. Optimizing Rapid Sequence Intubation for Medical and Trauma Patients in the Pediatric Emergency Department. Pediatr Qual Saf 2020 25; 5(5): e353.https://doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000353

Asim M, Nawaz Y. Child Malnutrition in Pakistan: Evidence from Literature. Children 2018; 5(5): 60. https://doi.org/10.3390/children5050060

Uzumcugil F, Celebioglu EC, Ozkaragoz DB, Yilbas AA, Akca B, Lotfinagsh N, et al. Body Surface Area Is Not a Reliable Predictor of Tracheal Tube Size in Children. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 2018; 11(4): 301-308. https://doi.org/10.21053/ceo.2018.00178

Rajasekar M, Moningi S, Patnaik S, Rao P. Correlation between Ultrasound-guided subglottic diameter and little finger breadth with the outer diameter of the endotracheal tube in paediatric patients - A prospective observational study. Indian J Anaesth 2018; 62(12): 978-983. https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.IJA_545_18

Gupta B, Ahluwalia P. Prediction of endotracheal tube size in the pediatric age group by Ultrasound: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2022; 38(3): 371-383 https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_650_20

Gupta K, Gupta PK, Rastogi B, Krishan A, Jain M, Garg G. Assessment of the subglottic region by ultrasonography for estimation of appropriate size endotracheal tube: A clinical prospective study. Anesth Essays Res 2012; 6(2): 157-160 https://doi.org/10.4103/0259-1162.108298

Qazi SH, Dogar SA, Dogar SA, Fitzgerald T, Saleem A, Das JK. Global perspective of paediatric surgery in low and middle income countries. J Pak Med Assoc 2019 1; 69(suppl 1): S108-111.

John E. Morrison; Children at Increased Risk of Hypoxia.Anesthesiology 2000; 92: 1844. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-200006000-00052

Harless J, Ramaiah R, Bhananker SM. Pediatric airway management. International journal of critical illness and injury science 2014; 4(1): 65 https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-5151.128015

Ye R, Cai F, Guo C, Zhang X, Yan D, Chen C, Chen B .Assessing the accuracy of Ultrasound measurements of tracheal diameter: an in vitro experimental study.BMC Anesthesiol 2021; 1(2).177-180. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-021-01398-3

Kwon JH, Shin YH, Gil NS, Yeo H, Jeong JS. Analysis of the functionally-narrowest portion of the pediatric upper airway in sedated children. Medicine 2018; 97(27): e11365. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000011365

Yim A, Doctor J, Aribindi S, Ranasinghe L. Cuffed vs Uncuffed Endotracheal Tubes for Pediatric Patients: A Review. Asploro Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Case Reports 2021; 4(1): 50 http://dx.doi.org/10.36502/2021/ASJBCCR.6228

Rajasekhar M, Moningi S, Patnaik S, Rao P. Correlation between Ultrasound-guided subglottic diameter and little finger breadth with the outer diameter of the endotracheal tube in paediatric patients - A prospective observational study. Indian J Anaesth 2018; 62(12): 978-983. https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_545_18

Arnold MJ, Jonas CE, Carter RE. Point-of-Care Ultrasonography. Am Fam Physician. 2020 1; 101(5): 275-285 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.NPR.0000841944.00536.b2

Downloads

Published

31-12-2024

Issue

Section

Original Articles

How to Cite

1.
Alam T, Qureshi S, Ali CA, Hussain A, Majeed K, Qarni A. Comparison of Ultrasound and Motoyama Formula for Estimation of Endotracheal Tube Diameter in Pediatric Patients. Pak Armed Forces Med J [Internet]. 2024 Dec. 31 [cited 2025 Jan. 13];74(6):1588-92. Available from: https://pafmj.org/PAFMJ/article/view/10269