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
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
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
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
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.