Skip to content

Tracheal Tube Cuff Shape and Pressure

Cuff Pressure During Surgical Retractor Splay and Postoperative Voice Outcome After Anterior Cervical Spine Surgery: Comparison Between Tapered-shaped and Conventional Cylindrical-shaped Endotracheal Tube

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04591769
Enrollment
80
Registered
2020-10-19
Start date
2020-11-05
Completion date
2021-06-30
Last updated
2021-09-17

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Dysphonia, Intubation, Intratracheal, Pain, Postoperative

Brief summary

This is a randomized controlled trial focusing on the effect of different tracheal tube cuff shape; the tapered-shaped tracheal tube cuff versus the cylindrical-shaped tracheal cuff in anterior cervical spine surgery.

Detailed description

High endotracheal cuff pressure (ETCP) during surgical retractor splay associates with recurrent laryngeal nerve paresis/ palsy and results in post-anterior cervical spine surgery (post-ACSS) dysphonia. Control of intraoperative ETCP during ACSS may benefit voice outcome. The taper-shaped tracheal tube cuff was originally designed as a new strategy to reduce fluid leakage across the conventional cylindrical cuff and prevention of ventilator associated pneumonia. Literature has revealed the just seal pressure for the tapered-shaped tracheal tube (TT) cuff was lower than conventional cylindrical cuff. Therefore the investigators hypothesize that use of a tapered-shaped ET cuff during the surgery can lead to a lower ETCP during retractors splay and improve voice recovery after ACSS. In this study, 80 patients were randomized into 2 groups, to receive endotracheal intubation using TaperGuard tracheal tube (tapered- shaped cuff) or a conventional tracheal tube (a cylindrical cuff). The just seal pressure, intraoperative cuff pressure, and postoperative sore throat and voice outcome are recorded and compared.

Interventions

DEVICEDifferent tracheal tube cuff design

Comparison of effect between 2 different designs of tracheal tube cuff

Sponsors

Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan
Lead SponsorOTHER_GOV

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

The patient will be intubated by an anesthesiologist who is aware of the grouping. After tracheal intubation is finished, the cuff is connected to the pressure monitor system and another blinded assessor will adjust and record the minimal volume that is required for sealing the tracheal tube-ventilator. The cuff pressure will be monitored and recorded all throughout the surgical period. A blinded assessor will follow up the patient after the surgery and do the voice analysis. Patients are unaware of the type of tracheal tube they used and will score subjectively for the sore throat and postoperative dysphonia.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 90 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Receiving elective anterior cervical spine surgery * Right side approach

Exclusion criteria

* Unstable cervical spine (acute trauma history, or dislocation/ subluxation in image studies) * Anticipated difficult airway * Facial anomaly that may hinder facemask ventilation * Preoperative hoarseness or vocal cord palsy regardless of etiology * Re-operation of cervical spine surgery or left side approach * BMI \>35 * Operation field involved cervical spine C1 or C2 * Unwilling to sign the informed consent * Unwilling to finish the study

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Just seal tracheal tube cuff pressure1 minute after anesthesia and tracheal intubationMinimal tracheal tube cuff pressure that prevent leakage of the ventilator system
Tracheal tube cuff pressure on retractor splayIntraoperative monitoringCuff pressure when the retractors are set-up and removed

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Subjective dysphoniapreOP day 1, post OP 2 hours, day 1, 2, 3, 7Hoarseness; Pitch; Loudness (0= none; 1= mild; 2= severe); compared with baseline
Subjective dysphonia-GRBAS scoreOne day before operation, and post operation day 1GRBAS (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, Strain) score (normal, slight, moderate, severe); compared with baseline
Sore throat-NRSpreOP(operation) day 1, post OP 2 hours, day 1, 2, 3, 7Postoperative sore throat, Numeric Rating Scale(NRS) 0\ 10; 0=no sore throat; 10=maximal sore throat
Objective dysphoniaOne day before operation(baseline), and post operation day 1Software voice analysis; compared with baseline
Postoperative complicationAfter operation to post operation day 7Any postoperative complication related complication
Subjective dysphonia- Voice Handicap Index-10(VHI-10)One day before operation, and post operation day 7VHI-10 questionnaire (0 best\ 40 worst; \>15 may be abnormal)
Sore throat-VASpreOP(operation) day 1, post OP 2 hours, day 1, 2, 3, 7Postoperative sore throat, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) 0\ 10; 0=no sore throat; 10=maximal sore throat

Countries

Taiwan

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 12, 2026