Robotic-assisted cardiac surgery without lung isolation utilizing single-lumen endotracheal tube intubation
Journal of Cardiac Surgery, cilt.35, sa.6, ss.1267-1274, 2020 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 35 Sayı: 6
- Basım Tarihi: 2020
- Doi Numarası: 10.1111/jocs.14575
- Dergi Adı: Journal of Cardiac Surgery
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1267-1274
- Anahtar Kelimeler: double-lumen endotracheal intubation, lung isolation, minimally invasive cardiac surgery, robotic cardiac surgery, single-lumen endotracheal intubation
- Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Objectives: This study assessed the feasibility and outcomes of performing robotic cardiac surgery without lung isolation using single-lumen (SL) endotracheal tube intubation. Methods: Between 2013 and 2017, 132 patients underwent robotically-assisted atrial septal defect closure. A retrospective analysis was performed of 23 patients (11 males, mean age 30.9 ± 5 years) who underwent robotic surgery with double-lumen (DL) endotracheal tube intubation (group 1) compared with 109 patients (57 males, mean age 32.4 ± 7.5 years) undergoing the same procedure with SL endotracheal intubation (group 2). The patient groups were compared in terms of demographic characteristics, operative data, and complications. The technical feasibility of the robotic procedure without lung isolation was evaluated. Results: There were no mortality, intraoperative complication, and conversion. Mean total anesthesia time was significantly decreased in the SL intubation group (238.3 ± 22.4 vs 227.2 ± 21.2 minutes; P =.025). First-pass intubation success was significantly higher in the SL intubation group (17 [73.9%] vs 98 [89.9%] patients; P =.032). Mean ventilation time (10.9 ± 5.3 hours), intensive care unit stay (16.8 ± 10.1 hours), and the length of hospital stay (3.8 ± 1.2 days) was significantly decreased in patients with SL tube (P <.05). Unilateral reexpansion pulmonary edema was observed in five (21.7%) patients with DL tube, whereas no patient with SL tube had this complication. Conclusions: SL endotracheal tube intubation without lung isolation is a feasible and safe airway alternative in robotic cardiac procedures. This approach resulted in shorter anesthesia time, ventilation time and the length of hospital stay. Port placement and robotic set-up can be uneventfully performed without lung isolation.