Garza HH, Vega RF, Zubiaur GF, Duran ALM, Álvarez RRD, Camacho RCI

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 17-24
PDF size: 942.89 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: Surgical management of laryngotracheal structures requires special training. Traditional training for laryngotracheal endoscopic surgery is done through observation and subsequent application of acquired skills. Various models of training with different advantages and disadvantages have been designed.
Objective: To present the model of swine larynx for endoscopy-assisted laryngotracheal surgery training.
Materials and method: The opinions of 10 otolaryngologists and Head and Neck surgeons with experience in laryngotracheal surgery, and who had used the proposed approach, were collected through the application of a questionnaire.
Results: The median and mode for the analysis of the similarity between the swine model and the human larynx in all cases were 4, which indicates “very similar” structures. Regarding the usefulness of the swine model medium and mode, it also was 4 (very useful). In all cases the chi-square test was greater than 0.05 demonstrating that there is no statistically significant difference between the swine model and the human larynx.
Conclusion: There are no significant differences between this swine model and the human larynx, which makes it a useful, accessible and low-cost alternative for training in this type of surgery.

REFERENCES

1. Tan SS, Sarker SK. Simulation in surgery: a review. Scott Med J 2011;56(2):104-109.

2. Stringer R, Bajenov S, Yentis SM. Training in airway management. Anaesthesia 2002;57(10):967-983.

3. Ramírez-García A, Gutiérrez-Guzmán C, Jasso Victoria R, Olmos- Zúñiga R, Sotres-Vega A. Traqueostomía percutánea: modelo experimental en perros para entrenamiento quirúrgico. An Orl Mex 2005;5(2):21-25.

4. Schaumann N, Lorenz V, Schellongowski P, Staudinger T, et al. Evaluation of Seldinger technique emergency cricothyroidotomy versus standard surgical cricothyroidotomy in 200 cadavers. Anesthesiology 2005;102(1):7-11.

5. Mariappa V, Stachowski E, Balik M, Clark P, Nayyar V. Cricothyroidotomy: comparison of three different techniques on a porcine airway. Anaesth Intensive Care 2009;37(6):961-967.

6. Gardiner Q, White PS, Carson D, Shearer A, et al. Technique training: endoscopic percutaneous tracheostomy. Br J Anaesth 1998;81(3):401-403.

7. Forbes RB, Murray DJ, Albanese MA. Evaluation of an animal model for teaching fibreoptic tracheal intubation. Can J Anaesth 1989;36(2):141-144.

8. Cho J, Kang GH, Kim EC, Oh YM, et al. Comparison of manikin versus porcine models in cricothyrotomy procedure training. Emerg Med J 2008;25(11):732-734.

9. Murphy C, Rooney SJ, Maharaj CH, Laffey JG, Harte BH. Comparison of three cuffed emergency percutaneous cricothyroidotomy devices to conventional surgical cricothyroidotomy in a porcine model. Br J Anaesth 2011;106(1):57-64.

10. Kulkarni NV. Cricothyrotomy pig model flawed. Emerg Med J 2009;26(8):623.