DOI
https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v7i3.563Abstract
PICO question
In domestic rabbits undergoing anaesthesia, how does the use of supraglottic airway devices compare to endotracheal intubation for ease of use in achieving a patent airway and maintaining a stable anaesthesia?
Clinical bottom line
Category of research question
Treatment
The number and type of study designs reviewed
Five papers were reviewed to answer this clinical question including four randomised controlled trials, one of which was a randomised crossover trial and one peer-reviewed conference proceeding
Strength of evidence
Moderate
Outcomes reported
There is evidence to support that supraglottic devices were easier and faster to insert than endotracheal tubes and were used effectively to achieve and maintain a patent airway and anaesthesia. They were however, more easily displaced and took up more space in the oral cavity. Evidence also supports endotracheal intubation can be used to effectively achieve a patent airway and maintain a stable anaesthesia however, can result in more damage to tracheal mucosa when attempted blindly and required higher doses of induction drugs to use
Conclusion
Based on current available evidence, endotracheal intubation is an excellent option for maintaining a patent airway and anaesthesia in rabbit patients as it is a tried and tested method, however, can cause tracheal damage if conducted blindly. Supraglottic airways devices can be used as an alternative where endotracheal intubation is unsuccessful. They can also be used where speed of obtaining a patent airway is imperative such as in an emergency as they may be easier and faster to apply, especially in inexperienced practitioners without the necessary equipment for safe endotracheal intubation. Supraglottic devices are unsuitable for procedures that require access to the oral cavity and / or patient movement, due to the size and easier loss of seal during movement potentiating risk of aspiration. Both supraglottic devices and endotracheal intubation are superior to face masks which evidence shows have more leakage, dead space and increased risk of hypercapnia
How to apply this evidence in practice
The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources.
Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.
References
American Society of Anesthesiologists. (2020). ASA Physical Status Classification System. Available at: https://www.asahq.org/standards-and-guidelines/asa-physical-status-classification-system" target="_blank">https://www.asahq.org/standards-and-guidelines/asa-physical-status-classification-system Accessed 1 Jan 2022.
Bateman, L., Ludders, J.W., Gleed, R.D. & Erb, H.N. (2005). Comparison between facemask and laryngeal mask airway in rabbits during isoflurane anesthesia. Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia. 32(5), 280–288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2995.2005.00169.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2995.2005.00169.x
Benito, S., Hadley, S., Camprubí-Camprubí, M. & Sanchez-De-toledo, J. (2021). Blind Endotracheal Intubation in Neonatal Rabbits. Journal of Visualized Experiments. 168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3791/61874" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3791/61874
Brodbelt, D.C., Blissitt, K.J., Hammond, R.A., Neath, P.J., Young, L.E., Pfeiffer, D.U. & Wood, J.L.N. (2008). The risk of death: the Confidential Enquiry into Perioperative Small Animal Fatalities. Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia. 35(5), 365–373. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2995.2008.00397.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2995.2008.00397.x
Cook, T.M. (2008). Novel Airway Devices: Spoilt for Choice? Anaesthesia. 58(2), 107–110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2044.2003.03047.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2044.2003.03047.x
Comolli, J., Schnellbacher, R., Beaufrere, H., Blas-Machado, U., Quandt, J., Mayer, J. & Divers, S.J. (2020). Comparison of endoscopic endotracheal intubation and the v-gel® supraglottic airway device for spontaneously ventilating New Zealand white rabbits undergoing ovariohysterectomy. Veterinary Record. 187(10), 84–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.105746" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.105746
Corleta, O., Habazettl, H., Kreimeier, U. & Vollmar, B. (1992). Modified Retrograde Orotracheal Intubation Technique for Airway Access in Rabbits. European Surgical Research. 24, 129–132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000129198" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1159/000129198
Crotaz, I.R. (2010). Initial feasibility investigation of the v-gel® airway: an anatomically designed supraglottic airway device for use in companion animal veterinary anaesthesia. Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia. 37(6), 579–580. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2995.2010.00566.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2995.2010.00566.x
Crotaz, I.R. (2013). An observational clinical study in cats and rabbits of an anatomically designed supraglottic airway device for use in companion animal veterinary anaesthesia. Veterinary Record. 172(23), 606–606. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.100668" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.100668
Cruz, M.L., Sacchi, T., Luna, S.P.L., Braz, J.R.C. & Cassu, R.N. (2000). Use of a laryngeal mask for airway maintenance during inhalation anaesthesia in rabbits. Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia. 27(2), 115–116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-2995.2000.00018-5.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-2995.2000.00018-5.x
Engbers, S., Larkin, A., Rousset, N., Prebble, M., Jonnalagadda, M., Knight, C.G. & Pang, D.S.J. (2017). Comparison of a Supraglottic Airway Device (v-gel®) with Blind Orotracheal Intubation in Rabbits. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 4, 49–49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2017.00049" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2017.00049
Grint, N.J., Sayers, I.R., Cecchi, R., Harley, R. & Day, M.J. (2006). Postanaesthetic tracheal strictures in three rabbits. Laboratory Animals Limited. 40(3), 301–308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1258/002367706777611415" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1258/002367706777611415
Kazakos, G.M., Anagnostou, T., Savvas, I., Raptopoulos, D., Psalla, D. & Kazakou, I.M. (2007). , Use of the laryngeal mask airway in rabbits: placement and efficacy. Lab Animal. 36, 29–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/laban0407-29" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/laban0407-29
Manning, P.J., Ringler, D.H. & Newcomer, C.E. (1994). The Biology of the Laboratory Rabbit. Elsevier Science & Technology, Saint Louis.
Navarrete-Calvo, R., Gómez-Villamandos, R.J., Morgaz, J., Manuel Domínguez, J., Fernández-Sarmiento, A., Muñoz-Rascón, P., López Villalba, I. & Del Mar Granados, M. (2014). Cardiorespiratory, anaesthetic and recovery effects of morphine combined with medetomidine and alfaxalone in rabbits. Veterinary Record. 174(4), 95–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.101293" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.101293
Phaneuf, L.R., Barker, S., Groleau, M.A. & Turner, P.V. (2006). Tracheal injury after endotracheal intubation and anesthesia in rabbits. Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science. 45(6), 67–72. DOI: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17089996/" target="_blank">https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17089996/
Ranchère, J.Y., Gordiani, B., Lupo, C., Serror, P.M. & Bobin, J.Y. (1992). Oesophageal perforation during an endotracheal intubation attempt. Annales Françaises ’d’Anesthésie et de Réanimation. 11(1), 100–102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0750-7658(05)80326-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0750-7658(05)80326-0
Thompson, K.L., Meier, T.R. & Scholz, J.A. (2017). Endotracheal Intubation of Rabbits Using a Polypropylene Guide Catheter. Journal of Visualized Experiments. 129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3791/56369" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3791/56369
Toman, H., Erbas, M., Sahin, H., Kiraz, H.A., Uzun, M. & Ovali, M.A. (2015). Comparison of the effects of various airway devices on hemodynamic response and QTc interval in rabbits under general anesthesia. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing. 29, 727–732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-015-9659-x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-015-9659-x
Tran, H.S., Puc, M.M., Tran, J.L.V., Del Rossi, A.J. & Hewitt, C.W. (2001). A method of endoscopic endotracheal intubation in rabbits. Laboratory Animals Limited. 35(3), 249–252. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1258/0023677011911705" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1258/0023677011911705
Wenger, S., Müllhaupt, D., Ohlerth, S., Prasse, S., Klein, K., da Silva Valenta, B. & Mosing, M. (2017). Experimental evaluation of four airway devices in anaesthetized New Zealand White rabbits. Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia. 44(3), 529–537. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaa.2016.05.009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaa.2016.05.009
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Sarah Daphne Foo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Veterinary Evidence uses the Creative Commons copyright Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. That means users are free to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. Remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially - with the appropriate citation.
