↓ Skip to main content

Entrapment of a laryngotracheal topical anesthesia kit during tracheobronchial foreign body removal: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Anesthesiology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Entrapment of a laryngotracheal topical anesthesia kit during tracheobronchial foreign body removal: a case report
Published in
BMC Anesthesiology, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12871-018-0529-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xi-Yang Zhang, Yun Han, Ya-Bing Zhang, Ke-Xuan Liu, Bin Liu

Abstract

In order to reduce the irritation of the airway during tracheobronchial foreign body (TFB) removal, tracheal surface anesthesia is usually performed using a laryngotracheal topical anesthesia (LTA) kit (LTA20, Highgreen Medical Technology Company, China), but difficulty in withdrawing the LTA kit is rarely reported. We present a case of a difficulty to withdraw the LTA kit due to its entrapment by the movement of a TFB. A 1-year-old girl was undergoing TFB removal. After the surgeon completed the tracheal surface anesthesia, the girl suddenly suffered from bucking, leading to the dislodgment of the TFB to the subglottic region, complicating the withdrawal of the LTA applicator. At the same time, the girl's oxygen saturation (SpO2) decreased to 91% and her heart rate dropped from 150 to 100 bpm. Atropine and succinylcholine were administered intravenously immediately, then the surgeon tried to free the TFB by pushing it back into the trachea, after which the LTA applicator was easily withdrawn, and TFB was removed successfully. The girl was discharged from hospital without any complications 2 days later. This case report draws our attention to a significant anesthetic clinical consideration during the application of topical anesthesia on the trachea for TFB removal. The possibility of coughing or bucking can lead to migration of the TFB with subsequent airway obstruction, so the depth of anesthesia must be sufficient to prevent harmful reflexes. Also, strong teamwork and good communication are paramount to avoid serious complications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 22%
Other 2 9%
Librarian 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 6 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 9%
Computer Science 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 6 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 June 2018.
All research outputs
#17,974,941
of 23,083,773 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#857
of 1,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,779
of 330,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#21
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,083,773 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,515 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,312 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.