Emergency cricothyrotomy—A comparative study of different techniques in human cadavers

BackgroundEmergency cricothyrotomy is the final lifesaving option in “cannot intubate–cannot ventilate” situations. Fast, efficient and safe management is indispensable to reestablish oxygenation, thus the quickest, most reliable and safest technique should be used. Several cricothyrotomy techniques exist, which can be grouped into two categories: anatomical-surgical and puncture.MethodsWe studied success rate, tracheal tube insertion time and complications of different techniques, including a novel cricothyrotomy scissors technique in human cadavers. Sixty-three inexperienced health care providers were randomly assigned to apply either an anatomical-surgical technique (standard surgical technique, n = 18; novel cricothyrotomy scissors technique, n = 14) or a puncture technique (catheter-over-needle technique, n = 17; wire-guided technique, n = 14).ResultsAirway access was almost always successful with the anatomical-surgical techniques (success rate in standard surgical group 94%, scissors group 100%). In contrast, the success rate was smaller (p < 0.05) with the puncture techniques (catheter-over-needle group 82%, wire-guided technique 71%). Tracheal tube insertion time was faster overall (p < 0.05) with anatomical-surgical techniques (standard surgical 78 s [54–135], novel cricothyrotomy scissors technique 60 s [42–82]; median [IQR]) than with puncture techniques (catheter-over-needle technique 74 s [48–145], wire-guided technique 135 s [116–307]). We observed fewer complications with anatomical-surgical techniques than with puncture techniques (p < 0.001).ConclusionsIn inexperienced health care personnel, anatomical-surgical techniques showed a higher success rate, a faster tracheal tube insertion time and a lower complication rate compared with puncture techniques, suggesting that they may be the techniques of choice in emergencies.