Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2011 Jun;106(6):896-902.
doi: 10.1093/bja/aer086. Epub 2011 Apr 14.

Randomized clinical trial comparing double-lumen tube and EZ-Blocker for single-lung ventilation

Affiliations
Free article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Randomized clinical trial comparing double-lumen tube and EZ-Blocker for single-lung ventilation

K Ruetzler et al. Br J Anaesth. 2011 Jun.
Free article

Abstract

Background: In several clinical situations, lung separation and single-lung ventilation (SLV) is essential. In these cases, the double-lumen tube (DLT) is the most widely used device. Bronchial blocker such as Univent or Arndt Blocker serves as an alternative. The EZ-Blocker(®) (EZ; AnaesthetIQ B.V., Rotterdam, The Netherlands) is a new device promising to exceed clinical performance of DLT. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical performance of EZ in comparison with conventional left-sided DLT.

Methods: Forty adult patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery requiring thoracotomy and SLV were included in this study. The patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: EZ (combined with conventional 7.5 or 8.5 mm single-lumen tube) or DLT (37 or 39 Fr left-sided DLT). Time for intubation procedure and time to verification of the correct position of EZ or DLT using fibreoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) were recorded. After surgery, a thoracic surgeon rated the quality of collapse of the lung (1-3 on a three-level scale).

Results: Time for intubation using DLT 85.5 (54.8) s was significantly faster (P<0.001) than using EZ 192 (89.7) s, whereas time for bronchoscopy was not significantly different (P=0.556). Conditions of surgery were rated equally [DLT 1.3 (0.6) vs EZ 1.4 (0.6), P=0.681].

Conclusions: Although time for intubation was longer with the EZ, the device proved to be an efficient and easy-to-use device. The EZ is a valuable alternative device to conventional DLT. Verification of the correct position of the EZ by FOB seems to be obligatory. This study was registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT01171560).

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources