The minimal leak test technique for endotracheal cuff maintenance

17Citations
Citations of this article
45Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Endotracheal tube (ETT) cuff pressure management is an essential part of airway management in intubated and mechanically ventilated patients. Both under- and over-inflation of the ETT cuff can lead to patient complications, with an ideal pressure range of 20-30 cmH2O defined. A range of techniques are employed to ensure adequate ETT cuff inflation, with little comparative data. We performed an observational cross-sectional study in a tertiary metropolitan ICU, assessing the relationship between the minimal leak test and cuff manometry. Forty-five mechanically ventilated patients, over a three-month period, had ETT cuff manometry performed at the same time as their routine cuff maintenance (minimal leak test). Bedside nurse measurements were compared with investigator measurements. At the endpoint of cuff inflation, 20 of 45 patients (44%) had cuff pressures between 20 and 30 cmH2O; 11 of 45 patients (24%) had cuff pressures <20 cmH2O; 14 of 45 patients (31%) had cuff pressures ≥30 cmH2O. Univariate analysis demonstrated an association between both patient obesity and female gender requiring less ETT cuff volume (P=0.008 and P <0.001 respectively), though this association was lost on multivariate analysis. No association was demonstrated between any measured variables and cuff pressures. Inter-operator reliability in performing the minimal leak test showed no evidence of bias between nurse and investigators (Pearson coefficient = 0.897). We conclude the minimal leak test for maintenance of ETT cuffs leads to both over- and under-inflation, and alternative techniques, such as cuff manometry, should be employed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Harvie, D. A., Darvall, J. N., Dodd, M., De La Cruz, A., Tacey, M., D’Costa, R. L., & Ward, D. (2016). The minimal leak test technique for endotracheal cuff maintenance. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, 44(5), 599–604. https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057x1604400512

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free