Airway Management and Anesthetic Care

A special issue of Medicina (ISSN 1648-9144). This special issue belongs to the section "Intensive Care/ Anesthesiology".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (28 February 2025) | Viewed by 2453

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, 84 Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul 06911, Republic of Korea
Interests: ambulatory anesthesia; airway management; non-operating room anesthesia; evidence-based medicine; meta-analysis; systematic review
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul 06911, Republic of Korea
Interests: anesthesia and critical care; airway management; epidemiology; evidence-based medicine; meta-analysis; systematic review; statistics

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Airway management is making remarkable progress in the field of anesthesiology. With the advent of new drugs and advanced medical devices, the anesthetic experience for patients has significantly improved in clinical practice. These innovations not only enhance patient safety but also optimize procedural efficiency and outcomes. In particular, in the modern era, various new procedures are being performed not only in the operating theater but also in diverse settings such as emergency departments, intensive care units, and outpatient clinics. Each of these settings presents unique challenges and requires tailored approaches to airway management and anesthesia specific to the procedure and the patient.

This Special Issue will delve into these advancements and explore a wide range of topics related to airway management and anesthetic care. We invite submissions that include topical reviews, clinical articles, case reports, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews. We welcome updated research on previously published topics and contributions that address the application of these advancements in various clinical settings, emphasizing the adaptability and safety of these new practices.

By bringing together cutting-edge research and clinical insights, this Special Issue aims to provide a comprehensive resource for practitioners dedicated to improving patient outcomes in airway management and anesthetic care. We encourage you to contribute to this Special Issue and share your valuable expertise and findings with the wider medical community.

Prof. Dr. Hyun Kang
Dr. Geun Joo Choi
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Medicina is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2200 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • airway management
  • anesthesia
  • airway device
  • critical care
  • monitored anesthesia care
  • meta-analysis

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

15 pages, 354 KiB  
Article
Comparison of the Effects of Propofol–Dexmedetomidine and Thiopental–Dexmedetomidine Combinations on the Success of Classical Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertions, Hemodynamic Responses, and Pharyngolaryngeal Morbidity
by Mensure Çakırgöz, İsmail Demirel, Aysun Afife Kar, Ergin Alaygut, Ömürhan Saraç, Emre Karagöz, Oğuzhan Demirel and Mert Akan
Medicina 2025, 61(5), 783; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina61050783 - 23 Apr 2025
Viewed by 503
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Dexmedetomidine is a potent selective α2 receptor agonist with analgesic and sedative effects. Many reports indicate that compared to fentanyl, the combination of dexmedetomidine with propofol provides comparably acceptable conditions for a laryngeal mask airway (LMA). However, no [...] Read more.
Background and Objectives: Dexmedetomidine is a potent selective α2 receptor agonist with analgesic and sedative effects. Many reports indicate that compared to fentanyl, the combination of dexmedetomidine with propofol provides comparably acceptable conditions for a laryngeal mask airway (LMA). However, no study has evaluated the effectiveness of combined dexmedetomidine and thiopental in LMA insertions compared to that of combined dexmedetomidine and propofol. This prospective, randomized, double-blind study aimed to compare the effects of dexmedetomidine with thiopental or propofol on LMA insertion conditions, hemodynamic responses, and pharyngolaryngeal morbidity, which in this study was defined as the presence of postoperative sore throat, dysphagia, or visible blood in the airway following a laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion. Materials and Methods: A total of 80 premedicated ASA I-II patients aged 18–65 years were randomized to the propofol group (Group P, n = 40) or thiopental group (Group T, n = 40). Anesthesia was induced by infusing 1 μg·kg−1 dexmedetomidine over 10 min followed by 2.5 mg·kg−1 propofol or 5 mg·kg−1 thiopental. LMA insertion conditions were evaluated on a scale assessing six variables. Systolic arterial pressure (SAP), diastolic arterial pressure (DAP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), and bispectral index values were recorded at baseline; 1 min before; and at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 min after an LMA insertion. The baseline values for the systolic arterial pressure (SAP), diastolic arterial pressure (DAP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), and bispectral index (BIS) values were recorded before dexmedetomidine infusion. Measurements for all patients were then taken 1 min before and at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 min after the LMA insertion Results: Demographic data were similar between the groups. In Group P, the time to loss of eyelash reflex and LMA insertion time were significantly shorter, the apnea duration was significantly longer, and the rates of full jaw opening and optimal LMA insertion conditions were significantly higher when compared with those of Group T (p < 0.05). Group P showed a significantly greater percentage decrease in HR compared to that of Group T at 1 min before and 1, 2, and 3 min after the LMA insertion (p < 0.05). Group T had a greater decrease in SAP and MAP at 1 min before insertion, while the SAP decrease was lower in Group T at 3, 4, and 5 min after insertion. The MAP and DAP values after the LMA insertion showed a greater decrease in Group P compared to in Group T (p < 0.05). The incidence of bradycardia was significantly (p < 0.05) higher in Group P than in Group T. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the frequency of hypotension, sore throat, presence of blood, or dysphagia at discharge from the recovery unit (p > 0.05). Conclusions: This study showed that the use of dexmedetomidine with thiopental provided comparably acceptable LMA insertion conditions with more stable hemodynamics compared to propofol. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Airway Management and Anesthetic Care)
10 pages, 866 KiB  
Article
Tracheostomy Practice in the Italian Intensive Care Units: A Point-Prevalence Survey
by Raffaele Merola, Maria Vargas, Filippo Sanfilippo, Marco Vergano, Giovanni Mistraletti, Luigi Vetrugno, Gennaro De Pascale, Elena Giovanna Bignami, Giuseppe Servillo and Denise Battaglini
Medicina 2025, 61(1), 87; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina61010087 - 7 Jan 2025
Cited by 9 | Viewed by 1593
Abstract
Background and Objectives: A tracheostomy is a frequently performed surgical intervention in intensive care units (ICUs) for patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. This procedure can offer significant benefits, including reduced sedation requirements, improved patient comfort, and enhanced airway management. However, it is [...] Read more.
Background and Objectives: A tracheostomy is a frequently performed surgical intervention in intensive care units (ICUs) for patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. This procedure can offer significant benefits, including reduced sedation requirements, improved patient comfort, and enhanced airway management. However, it is also associated with various risks, and the absence of standardized clinical guidelines complicates its implementation. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of tracheostomy among ICU patients, while also evaluating patient characteristics, complication rates, and overall outcomes related to the procedure. Materials and Methods: We conducted an observational, cross-sectional, point-prevalence survey across eight ICUs in Italy. Data were collected over two 24 h periods in March and April 2024, with a focus on ICU characteristics, patient demographics, the details of tracheostomy procedures, and associated complications. Results: Among the 92 patients surveyed in the ICUs, 31 (33.7%) had undergone tracheostomy. The overall prevalence of tracheostomy was found to be 9.1%, translating to a rate of 1.8 per 1000 admission days. The mean age of patients with a tracheostomy was 59.5 years (SD = 13.8), with a notable predominance of male patients (67.7%). Neurological conditions were identified as the most common reason for ICU admission, accounting for 48.4% of cases. Tracheostomy procedures were typically performed after a mean duration of 12.9 days of mechanical ventilation, primarily due to difficulties related to prolonged weaning (64.5%). Both early and late complications were observed, and 19.35% of tracheostomized patients did not survive beyond one month following the procedure. The average length of stay in the ICU for these patients was significantly extended, averaging 43.0 days (SD = 34.3). Conclusions: These findings highlight the critical role of tracheostomy in the management of critically ill patients within Italian ICUs. The high prevalence and notable complication rates emphasize the urgent need for standardized clinical protocols aimed at optimizing patient outcomes and minimizing adverse events. Further research is essential to refine current practices and develop comprehensive guidelines for the management of tracheostomy in critically ill patients. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Airway Management and Anesthetic Care)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop