Free
Case Reports  |   May 2002
Potential Disaster in Airway Management: A Misguided Airway Exchange Catheter via  a Hole Bitten into a Univent Endotracheal Tube
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • John H. Eisenach, M.D.
    *
  • Roxann D. Barnes, M.D.
  • *Anesthesiology Resident, †Assistant Professor.
  • Received from the Mayo Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota.
Article Information
Case Reports
Case Reports   |   May 2002
Potential Disaster in Airway Management: A Misguided Airway Exchange Catheter via  a Hole Bitten into a Univent Endotracheal Tube
Anesthesiology 5 2002, Vol.96, 1266-1268. doi:
Anesthesiology 5 2002, Vol.96, 1266-1268. doi:
PATIENTS requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation may need replacement of an endotracheal tube (ETT) for various reasons, including a cuff leak or a tube laceration. A common technique used is to change the ETT over a semirigid tube exchanger, also known as a bougie, or an airway exchange catheter (AEC). 1 One problem with this technique is that it is difficult to confirm quickly and confidently the correct placement of the tube exchanger. If the old ETT is removed over a misplaced tube exchanger, airway control is threatened.
Case Report
The anesthesia team was called to examine a 69-yr-old woman who remained intubated in the cardiac surgical intensive care unit 2 days after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair. A 7.5-mm Univent endotracheal tube (Fuji Systems, Tokyo, Japan) had been placed intraoperatively under direct laryngoscopy with “moderate” difficulty. The patient required postoperative mechanical ventilation secondary to slow neurologic recovery. She was sedated with continuous intravenous propofol. Muscle relaxants were not used. An oral bite block had not been placed, and the patient would occasionally bite the ETT. The respiratory therapist expressed concern about a cuff leak. Before our arrival, worsening arterial oxygen saturation had developed in the patient, and there was a discrepancy between inspiratory and expiratory tidal volumes. We performed fiberoptic bronchoscopy to confirm proper ETT placement and absence of mucous plugging. Attempts at reinflating the ETT cuff to prevent continued volume loss were unsuccessful. We elected to change the Univent tube to a standard single-lumen ETT. After bag–valve ventilation increased oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry (Spo2) to 100%, intravenous boluses of propofol and succinylcholine were administered. An 83-cm-long airway exchange catheter (Cook Critical Care, Bloomington, IN) was advanced with minor resistance. The Univent tube was withdrawn over the AEC until discovery of the exchange catheter exiting from a tear in the convex wall of the Univent tube at approximately 19 cm from the distal end (fig. 1). The ETT laceration had not been noted at the time of fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Because of the uncertainty of the location of the AEC, both the catheter and the Univent tube were withdrawn. Direct laryngoscopy was immediately performed, followed by successful oral tracheal intubation. Oxygenation and ventilatory parameters improved.
Fig. 1. An airway exchange catheter inadvertently exiting from a bitten hole in the convex wall of a Univent endotracheal tube during endotracheal tube exchange. This led to loss of airway control in a sedated, paralyzed patient.
Fig. 1. An airway exchange catheter inadvertently exiting from a bitten hole in the convex wall of a Univent endotracheal tube during endotracheal tube exchange. This led to loss of airway control in a sedated, paralyzed patient.
Fig. 1. An airway exchange catheter inadvertently exiting from a bitten hole in the convex wall of a Univent endotracheal tube during endotracheal tube exchange. This led to loss of airway control in a sedated, paralyzed patient.
×
Discussion
Anesthesiologists are frequently called on to perform endotracheal tube replacement. With this procedure, there is significant risk of losing control of the airway. Two separate but interrelated airway management issues are raised by this case report. The first issue is the patient biting the tube, which led to a complication. The second is that there was a failure of the AEC system.
There are numerous reports in the literature of complications related to ETTs being damaged by biting. 2,3 These complications are separated into tube occlusion and tube laceration. Occluded tubes may lead to acute hypoxemia and hypoventilation, and negative-pressure pulmonary edema. Lacerated tubes can also lead to hypoxemia and hypoventilation, plus aspiration and inability to suction the trachea for secretions. Intraoral separation might be the most devastating, as in one case report of a 4-yr-old girl who bit the ETT after emergence from anesthesia; on extubation, the distal portion of the ETT remained below the glottis, causing airway obstruction. 2 Particular to this situation are reports of the Univent tube being easily damaged. 4 
To prevent biting the ETT, many authors advocate using some apparatus, such as an oropharyngeal airway, oral bite block, or roll of gauze in the mouth. 5,6 However, these techniques are not foolproof because oral airways can soften and fail to prevent biting. 7 Furthermore, oral airways compete with endotracheal tubes for a central position in the mouth, which can lead to dislodgment, pressure sores, or lip, tongue, and tooth trauma. 8,9 Gauze packs are less traumatic but must be placed securely in the molars and packed with enough gauze to ensure a bite block effect. 5 
The second issue raised is that as a result of the biting, the tube exchange system failed. Different methods to exchange ETTs have been used in the past. Initially, ETT exchangers were urethral or suction catheters, nasogastric tubes, or stylets. 10–12 Creative mechanisms have been constructed to facilitate exchange from a double- to a single-lumen ETT. 13 An AEC is a hollow, semirigid catheter that can be used to intubate, change endotracheal tubes, provide oxygen insufflation and jet ventilation, or be left in situ  for “trial” extubation. 1,14,15 However, these are not without risk because complications include the following: (1) misplacement, (2) tracheobronchial trauma or lung laceration, (3) jet ventilation–associated barotrauma and pneumothorax, and (4) laryngeal or vocal cord trauma from a new ETT “hanging up” during exchange. 16–19 
In summary, biting of ETTs in nonparalyzed and sedated or lightly anesthetized patients is a potential problem and can lead to numerous complications if not recognized. Also, airway exchange catheters, although useful, are not foolproof, and misuse may be harmful. Potentially, combining AECs and fiberoptic bronchoscopy may prove to be the best method for safe endotracheal tube exchange. Anesthesiologists are reminded that they must have an algorithm available for extubation as well as intubation of the difficult airway. 20 
References
Cooper RM: Extubation and changing endotracheal tubes, Airway Management: Principles and Practice. Edited by Benumof J. St. Louis, Mosby-Yearbook, 1996, pp 874–85
Rodriguez R, Gonzalez H, Carranza A: Intraoral separation of a reinforced endotracheal tube (letter). A nesthesiology 2000; 93: 908–9Rodriguez, R Gonzalez, H Carranza, A
Hoffmann CO, Swanson GA: Oral reinforced endotracheal tube crushed and perforated from biting (letter). Anesth Analg 1989; 69: 552–3Hoffmann, CO Swanson, GA
Doi Y, Uda R, Akatsuka M, Tanaka Y, Kishida H, Mori H: Damaged Univent®tubes. Anesth Analg 1998; 87: 732–3Doi, Y Uda, R Akatsuka, M Tanaka, Y Kishida, H Mori, H
Negus B: Gauze bite block (letter). Anaesth Intensive Care 1997; 25: 589Negus, B
Kwan KM, Kok P, Koay CK: Prevention of tube occlusion caused by biting: Oral bite block versus oropharyngeal airway (letter). Anaesth Intensive Care 2000; 28: 227–30Kwan, KM Kok, P Koay, CK
King HK, Lewis K: Guedel oropharyngeal airway does not prevent patient biting on the endotracheal tube (letter). Anaesth Intensive Care 1996; 24: 729–30King, HK Lewis, K
Kandasamy R, Sivalingam P: Endotracheal tube damage in the presence of bite block (letter). A nesthesiology 1999; 90: 637Kandasamy, R Sivalingam, P
Alkire MT: Ventilatory compromise secondary to occlusion of an endotracheal tube's balloon air channel by a malpositioned bite block (letter). A nesthesiology 1998; 88: 1419Alkire, MT
Finucane BT, Kupshik HL: A flexible stilette for replacing damaged tracheal tubes. Can Anaesth Soc J 1978; 25: 153–4Finucane, BT Kupshik, HL
Desai SP, Fencl V: A safe technique for changing endotracheal tubes. (letter). A nesthesiology 1980; 53: 267Desai, SP Fencl, V
Cherian MN, Mathews MP: Use of a J-wire cover as an endotracheal tube changer. J Clin Anesth 1997; 9: 586–588Cherian, MN Mathews, MP
Griffin PR, Mitchell MR, Viswanathan S, Riopelle JM, Campbell CE, Karpan DJ: Use of plastic rod/sleeve combination to facilitate double- to single-lumen tracheal tube exchange in patients with difficult glottic visualization (letter). Anesth. Analg 1998; 87: 744Griffin, PR Mitchell, MR Viswanathan, S Riopelle, JM Campbell, CE Karpan, DJ
Millen JE, Glauser FL: A rapid, simple technique for changing endotracheal tubes. Anesth Analg 1978; 57: 735–6Millen, JE Glauser, FL
Cooper RM: The use of an endotracheal ventilation catheter in the management of difficult extubations. Can J Anaesth 1996; 43: 90–3Cooper, RM
Benumof JL: Additional safety measures when changing endotracheal tubes (letter). A nesthesiology 1991; 75: 921–2Benumof, JL
deLima LGR, Bishop MJ: Lung laceration after tracheal extubation over a plastic tube changer. Anesth Analg 1991; 73: 350–1deLima, LGR Bishop, MJ
Baraka AS: Tension pneumothorax complicating jet ventilation via  a Cook airway exchange catheter. A nesthesiology 1999; 91: 557–8Baraka, AS
Seitz PA, Gravenstein N: Endobronchial rupture from endotracheal reintubation with an endotracheal tube guide. J Clin Anesth 1989; 1: 214–7Seitz, PA Gravenstein, N
Caplan RA, Benumof JL, Berry FA, Blitt CD, Bode RH, Cheney FW, Connis RT, Guidry OF, Ovassapian A: Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: A report by the American Society of Anesthesiologist Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. A nesthesiology 1993; 78: 597–602Caplan, RA Benumof, JL Berry, FA Blitt, CD Bode, RH Cheney, FW Connis, RT Guidry, OF Ovassapian, A
Fig. 1. An airway exchange catheter inadvertently exiting from a bitten hole in the convex wall of a Univent endotracheal tube during endotracheal tube exchange. This led to loss of airway control in a sedated, paralyzed patient.
Fig. 1. An airway exchange catheter inadvertently exiting from a bitten hole in the convex wall of a Univent endotracheal tube during endotracheal tube exchange. This led to loss of airway control in a sedated, paralyzed patient.
Fig. 1. An airway exchange catheter inadvertently exiting from a bitten hole in the convex wall of a Univent endotracheal tube during endotracheal tube exchange. This led to loss of airway control in a sedated, paralyzed patient.
×