Abstract
Objective
To compare ultrasonography with chest radiograph to detect the level of endotracheal tube tip in intubated neonates.
Design
Observational.
Setting
Neonatal care unit of a teaching hospital.
Participants
53 neonates selected by convenience sampling.
Intervention
Ultrasonography of chest was done with probe of 5 to 8 MHz using high parasternal view. The distance of the endotracheal tube tip to the arch of aorta on ultrasonography was compared with level of endotracheal tube tip in radiograph.
Primary Outcome
Distance of endotracheal tube tip from the upper border of the arch of aorta on ultrasonography.
Results
Endotracheal tube tip was visualised on ultrasonography within 0.5–1.0 cm distance from upper border of arch of aorta in 48 out of 53 neonates. This corresponded with the normal position of endotracheal tip in radiograph at T2 to T3. In 5 neonates, endotracheal tube tip was not visualized on ultrasonography and in all these newborns it was at higher level in radiograph.
Conclusions
Distance of endotracheal tip to arch of aorta as measured on ultrasonography is helpful in early identification of the level of endotracheal tube tip.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bhende MS, Thompson AE. Evaluation of an end-tidal CO2 detector during pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Pediatrics. 1995;95:395–399
Grmec S. Comparison of three different methods to confirm tracheal tube placement in emergency intubation. Intensive Care Med. 2002;28:701–704
Jones JH, Murphy MP, Dickson RL, Somerville GG, Brizendine EJ. Emergency physician-verified out-ofhospital intubation: miss rates by paramedics. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11:707–709.
Katz SH, Falk JL. Misplaced endotracheal tubes by paramedics in an urban emergency medical services system. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;37:32–37.
Kelly JJ, Eynon CA, Kaplan JL, de Garavilla L, Dalsey WC. Use of tube condensation as an indicator of endotracheal tube placement. Ann Emerg Med. 1998;31:575–578.
Hosono S, Inami I, Fujita H, Minato M, Takahashi S, Mugishima H. A role of end-tidal CO2 monitoring for assessment of tracheal intubations in very low birth weight infants during neonatal resuscitation at birth. J Perinat Med. 2009;37:79–84.
Repetto JE, Donohue P-CP, Baker SF, Kelly L, Nogee LM. Use of capnography in the delivery room for assessment of endotracheal tube placement. J Perinatol. 2001;21:284–287.
Aziz HF, Martin JB, Moore JJ. The pediatric disposable end-tidal carbon dioxide detector role in endotracheal intubation in newborns. J Perinatol. 1999;19:110–113.
Harvey EB, Boice JD, Honeyman M, Flannery JT. Prenatal radiograph exposure and childhood cancer in twins. N Engl J Med. 1985;312:541–545.
Poznanski AK, Kanellitsas C, Roloff DW, Borer RC. Radiation exposure to personnel in a neonatal nursery. Pediatrics. 1974;54:139–141.
Galicinao J, Bush AJ, Godambe SA. Use of Bedside ultrasonography for endotracheal tube placement in pediatric patients — a feasibility study. Pediatrics. 2007; 120;1297–303.
Slovis T, Poland R. Endotracheal tube in neonates: sonographic positioning. Radiology. 1986;160:262–263.
Chun R, Kirkpatrick AW, Sirois M, Sargasyn AE, Melton S, Hamilton DR, et al. Where’s the tube? Evaluation of hand-held ultrasound in confirming endotracheal tube placement. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2004;19:366–369.
Lingle PA. Sonographic verification of endotracheal tube position in neonates: modified technique. J Clin Ultrasound. 1988;16:605–609.
Kerrey BT, Geis GL, Quinn AM, Hornung RW, Ruddy RM. A prospective comparison of diaphragmatic ultrasound and chest radiography to determine endotracheal tube position in a pediatric emergency department. Pediatrics. 2009; 123:e1039–1044.
Razzaq QM. Use of the ‘sliding lung sign’ in emergency bedside ultrasound. Eur J Emerg Med. 2008;15:238–241.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sethi, A., Nimbalkar, A., Patel, D. et al. Point of care ultrasonography for position of tip of endotracheal tube in neonates. Indian Pediatr 51, 119–121 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-014-0353-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-014-0353-8