Endotracheal suctioning: from principles to practice
- 758 Downloads
This paper aims to highlight the physical principles of pressure and flow dynamics underlying endotracheal suctioning, to demonstrate these on a simple illustrative model and to discuss the clinical implications of these principles for paediatric practice.
Prospective in vitro study.
Paediatric intensive care unit of a tertiary, academic hospital.
Measurements and main results
The peak pressure change (ΔP) obtained in a “bag-in-box” model was recorded during suctioning, using different combinations of endotracheal tube (ETT) and catheter sizes, different suction pressures and techniques. Suction was also performed on three different consistencies of gelatine, using a range of suction catheter sizes and vacuum pressures. The mass of gelatine suctioned per second was calculated. A large ΔP was measured when using neonatal-sized ETTs. There was a linear relationship (r=0,8, p<0.05) between ΔP and the ratio of external catheter area to area difference (internal ETT area−external catheter area). Significantly greater ΔP was measured when using a short versus long suction catheter (p<0.001) and when applying suction for longer duration (p<0,001) and with higher vacuum pressures (p<0.05). The amount of mucus suctioned in a given time was related to catheter size, suction pressure and mucus density.
Applied clinically, these results indicate that intrapulmonary pressure changes generated by the endotracheal suctioning of intubated neonates are likely to be considerable, possibly translating into loss of lung volume.
KeywordsEndotracheal suctioning Paediatric intensive care Intrathoracic pressure Endotracheal tube Suction catheter
We thank Lance Howell for technical support.
- 5.Carhuapoma JR, Williams MA (1999) Endotracheal suctioning and cerebral ischaemia in traumatic brain injury: The “phantom menace”? Crit Care Med27:2843–2844Google Scholar
- 12.Loubser MD, Mahoney PJ, Milligan DW (1989) Hazards of routine endotracheal suction in the neonatal unit. Lancet:1444–1445Google Scholar
- 27.Shann F (1998) Drug doses. 10th edn (1998) Collective Pty, USAGoogle Scholar
- 28.Black-Payne C (1993) Bronchiolitis. In: Hilman BC (ed) Pediatric respiratory disease: diagnosis and treatment. Saunders, Philadelphia p 208Google Scholar
- 29.Stocks J, Marchal F, Kraemer R, Gutkowski P, Yishay EP, Godfrey, S (1996) Plethysmographic assessment of functional residual capacity and airway resistance. In: Stocks J, Sly P, Tepper R, Morgan W (eds) Infant respiratory function testing. Wiley-Liss, Canada, p 196Google Scholar
- 30.Hodge D (1991) Endotracheal suctioning and the infant: a nursing care protocol to decrease complications. Neonatal Network 9:7–15. Cited in Young J (1995) To help or hinder: endotracheal suction and the intubated neonate. J Neonat Nurs 7:23–28Google Scholar
- 31.Kacmarek RM, Stoller JK (1995) Principles of respiratory care. In: Shoemaker WC, Ayres SM, Grenvik A, Holbrook P (eds) Textbook of critical care. 3rd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 695Google Scholar
- 32.Bethune DW, Collis JM, Wotherspoon CM (1971) Endotracheal suction. Anaesthesia 26:527–529Google Scholar
- 34.Hipenbecker DL, Guthrie MM (1981) The effects of negative pressure generated during endotracheal suctioning on lung volumes and pulmonary compliance. Am Rev Respir Dis 123:120Google Scholar
- 35.Polacek L, Guthrie MM (1981) The effect of suction catheter size and suction flow rate on negative airway pressure and its relationship to the fall in arterial oxygen tension. Am Rev Respir Dis 123:120Google Scholar