Mechanical ventilation and resuscitation under water: Exploring one of the last undiscovered environments--A pilot study.
Resuscitation · 2015-06-04 · Method & validation
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Airway management, mechanical ventilation and resuscitation can be performed almost everywhere--even in space--but not under water. The present study assessed the technical feasibility of resuscitation under water in a manikin model. METHODS: Tracheal intubation was assessed in a hyperbaric chamber filled with water at 20 m of depth using the Pentax AWS S100 video laryngoscope, the Fastrach™ intubating laryngeal mask and the Clarus optical stylet with guidance by a laryngeal mask airway (LMA) and without guidance. A closed suction system was used to remove water from the airways. A test lung was ventilated to a maximum depth of 50 m with a modified Oxylator(®) EMX resuscitator with its expiratory port connected either to a demand valve or a diving regulator. Automated chest compressions were performed to a maximum depth of 50 m using the air-driven LUCAS™ 1. RESULTS: The mean cumulative time span for airway management until the activation of the ventilator was 36 s for the Fastrach™, 57 s for the Pentax AWS S100, 53s for the LMA-guided stylet and 43 s for the stylet without LMA guidance. Complete suctioning of the water from the airways was not possible with the suction system used. The Oxylator(®) connected to the demand valve ventilated at 50 m depth with a mean ventilation rate of 6.5 min(-1) vs. 14.7 min(-1) and minute volume of 4.5 l min(-1) vs. 7.6 l min(-1) compared to the surface. The rate of chest compression at 50 m was 228 min(-1) vs. 106 min(-1) compared to surface. The depth of compressions decreased with increasing depth. CONCLUSION: Airway management under water appears to be feasible in this manikin model. The suction system requires further modification. Mechanical ventilation at depth is possible but modifications of the Oxylator(®) are required to stabilize ventilation rate and administered minute volumes. The LUCAS™ 1 cannot be recommended at major depth.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Endotracheal intubation · Mechanical CPR · Mechanical ventilation · Suction · Supraglottic airway · Video laryngoscopy
Related articles
- Optimizing airway management and ventilation during prehospital advanced life support in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A narrative review. (Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol, 2021)
- [Methods of airway management in prehospital emergency medicine]. (Anaesthesist, 2004)
- Using a laryngeal tube suction-device (LTS-D) reduces the "no flow time" in a single rescuer manikin study. (J Emerg Med, 2011)
- Two-part model for ventilator-free days in a cluster randomized cross-over clinical trial. (BMC Med Res Methodol, 2025)
- Comparative study of the McGrath™ videolaryngoscope blades and conventional laryngoscopy efficacy during mechanical chest compressions: Insights from a randomized trial with 90 anesthesiologists on objective and subjective parameters. (PLoS One, 2024)
- Comparison of the GlideScope® with the Macintosh Laryngoscope in Endotracheal Intubation during Uninterrupted Mechanical Chest Compression: A Randomised Crossover Manikin Study (Hong Kong Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2016)