CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03902756Updated Mar 11, 2020

Comparison Between Two Endotracheal Tube Cuff Inflation Methods

An interventional study of Endotracheal cuff inflation in Endotracheal Cuff Pressure, Flow-Volume Loop Guided and Stethoscope-guided, sponsored by Ramathibodi Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Thailand. Open to participants aged 4 Years to 12 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-03-11.

Sponsored by Ramathibodi Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 9 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Jun 2018, registered Apr 2019).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
80
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
4 Years to 12 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study is a prospective randomized controlled trial, the primary aim of this study to compare the intracuff pressure which is performed by 2 inflation methods. ( study in pediatric patients 4-12 year old) Group1 : Flow -Volume Loop-guided cuff inflation Group2 : Stethoscope-guided cuff inflation Our hypothesis is Flow-Volume Loop-guided cuff pressure will be lower than Stethoscope-guided cuff pressure.

This study also collect the incidence of common post-extubation respiratory adverse events coughing, hoarseness, stridor, croup as an secondary outcomes.

Read the detailed description

Historically, pediatric anesthesiologists abstained from using cuff-endotracheal tubes in children younger than 8 year of age because of the anatomical particularises of their airway and thus the increased risk of postintubation tracheal damage especially when Nitrous oxide is used for long procedures. In addition the tube size shoud be half size reduced when cuffed endotracheal tube is used, leading to higher airway resistance and increased risk of tube obstruction.

Recently, the use of Cuffed endotracheal tube has been increasing in children younger than 8 year of age who undergoing general anesthesia. Due to several reasons as follows 1) an increasingly sophisticated understanding of developing laryngeal anatomy 2) vastly improved materials in the manufacture of endotracheal tubes 3) cuffed endotracheal tubes serve several advantages over uncuffed endotracheal tubes including fewer laryngoscopies to replace ill-fitting tubes, less contamination of operating room with anesthetic gases, reliable capnography monitoring, better protection against aspiration, adequate ventilation with a low fresh gas flow which allow using low flow anesthsia, and also they are advantageous for certain operations such as laparoscopic/ airway procedures. 4) data are plentiful supporting the equal safety of using cuffed endotracheal tubes compared with uncuffed tubes in children However, using cuffed endotracheal tubes without being careful of cuff pressure may result in damage to tracheal mucosal wall especially in pediatric patients. The intra-cuff pressure should be monitored and maintained at the level below 25 cm H2O. The intra-cuff pressure more than 30 cmH2O causes obstruction to mucosal blood flow and increasing the risk of airway mucosal injury. Cuff pressure measurement by manometer is a gold standard, nevertheless manometer is not available in every operating room. Almost of anesthetists often use either manual palpation of pilot balloon or stethoscope-guided to inflate endotracheal tube cuff.

In adult studies, they found that endotracheal tube cuff pressure estimated by palpation even with experience personals is often much higher than 25-30 cmH2O. Therefore this inflation technique should be avoided in pediatric patients.

As for, stethoscope-guided endotracheal cuff inflation which pediatric anesthesiologists usually use for children. There were several studies in adult patients, they found the median cuff pressure from this inflation technique was 20 (16-28) cmH2O which is in acceptable tracheal cuff pressure.

In routine practice of general anesthesia rarely have continuous cuff pressure monitoring. When Nitrous Oxide is used for general anesthesia, the intra-cuff pressure can increase with time. Accordingly, it will be better to keep intra-cuff pressure as low as having proper sealing.

A couple studies from adult, compared endotracheal tube cuff inflation techniques between Pressure-Volume(PV) loop guided and stethoscope-guided and the results were intra-cuff pressure from PV loop guided was less than stethoscope guided. Moreover cuff-related complications ( coughing, sorethroat) were less in PV loop group also. It seems PV loop guided can provide least cuff pressure with efficient sealing.

This study would like to compare endotracheal cuff pressure that are performed by 2 techniques between Flow-Volume(FV) loop guided and stethoscope-guided in pediatric patients Intra-cuff pressure will be the primary outcome and we will also collect postoperative respiratory complications such as coughing, stridor, hoarseness as secondary outcomes.

02

Conditions studied

  • Endotracheal Cuff Pressure
  • Flow-Volume Loop Guided
  • Stethoscope-guided
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Ramathibodi Hospital is the lead sponsor of 62 studies on the registry; 6 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
4 Years to 12 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients are undergoing an operations in Ramathibodi hospital.
  • American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class 1-2
  • Endotracheal tube intubation is needed for an operation
  • Consent to participate in research project.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patient who is a predicted difficult intubation
  • Patient who has lung disease, airwar abnormalities
  • Patient who has pulmonary aspiration risk
  • Patient who has a previous sorethroat, hoarseness, respiratory tract infection in last 2 weeks
  • Refused to participate in research project
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Quadruple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
80 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Flow-Volume loop guided endotracheal cuff inflation

    Endotracheal cuff will be inflated by Flow-Volume loop guided until getting proper sealing.

    Other: Endotracheal cuff inflation

  • Active comparator
    Stethoscope-guided endotracheal cuff infration

    Endotracheal cuff will be inflated by Stethoscope-guided until getting proper sealing.

    Other: Endotracheal cuff inflation

Interventions

  • OtherEndotracheal cuff inflation

    Endotracheal cuff inflation is putting the air in to the endotracheal tube cuff to make the proper sealing.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Intra-cuff pressure

    measuring intra-cuff pressure of endotracheal tube by manometer (cm H2O)

    Time frame: Immediately after cuff inflation

Secondary outcomes

  1. Coughing

    incidence of coughing

    Time frame: 24 hours after extubation

  2. Hoarseness

    incidence of hoarseness

    Time frame: 24 hours after extubation

  3. Stridor

    incidence of stridor

    Time frame: 24 hours after extubation

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Ramathibodi Hospital
    Bangkok, Ratchathewi 10400, Thailand
08

References and documents

Publications

  • De Orange FA, Andrade RG, Lemos A, Borges PS, Figueiroa JN, Kovatsis PG. Cuffed versus uncuffed endotracheal tubes for general anaesthesia in children aged eight years and under. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 17;11(11):CD011954. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011954.pub2. PubMed 29149469 ↗
  • Holzki J, Brown KA, Carroll RG, Cote CJ. The anatomy of the pediatric airway: Has our knowledge changed in 120 years? A review of historic and recent investigations of the anatomy of the pediatric larynx. Paediatr Anaesth. 2018 Jan;28(1):13-22. doi: 10.1111/pan.13281. Epub 2017 Nov 17. PubMed 29148119 ↗
  • Litman RS, Weissend EE, Shibata D, Westesson PL. Developmental changes of laryngeal dimensions in unparalyzed, sedated children. Anesthesiology. 2003 Jan;98(1):41-5. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200301000-00010. PubMed 12502977 ↗
  • Tobias JD. Pediatric airway anatomy may not be what we thought: implications for clinical practice and the use of cuffed endotracheal tubes. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015 Jan;25(1):9-19. doi: 10.1111/pan.12528. Epub 2014 Sep 20. PubMed 25243638 ↗
  • Dalal PG, Murray D, Feng A, Molter D, McAllister J. Upper airway dimensions in children using rigid video-bronchoscopy and a computer software: description of a measurement technique. Paediatr Anaesth. 2008 Jul;18(7):645-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2008.02533.x. Epub 2008 May 8. PubMed 18482248 ↗
  • Dalal PG, Murray D, Messner AH, Feng A, McAllister J, Molter D. Pediatric laryngeal dimensions: an age-based analysis. Anesth Analg. 2009 May;108(5):1475-9. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e31819d1d99. PubMed 19372324 ↗
  • Litman RS, Maxwell LG. Cuffed versus uncuffed endotracheal tubes in pediatric anesthesia: the debate should finally end. Anesthesiology. 2013 Mar;118(3):500-1. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318282cc8f. No abstract available. PubMed 23314108 ↗
  • Weiss M, Dullenkopf A, Fischer JE, Keller C, Gerber AC; European Paediatric Endotracheal Intubation Study Group. Prospective randomized controlled multi-centre trial of cuffed or uncuffed endotracheal tubes in small children. Br J Anaesth. 2009 Dec;103(6):867-73. doi: 10.1093/bja/aep290. Epub 2009 Nov 3. PubMed 19887533 ↗
  • Shi F, Xiao Y, Xiong W, Zhou Q, Huang X. Cuffed versus uncuffed endotracheal tubes in children: a meta-analysis. J Anesth. 2016 Feb;30(1):3-11. doi: 10.1007/s00540-015-2062-4. Epub 2015 Aug 22. PubMed 26296534 ↗
  • Gopalareddy V, He Z, Soundar S, Bolling L, Shah M, Penfil S, McCloskey JJ, Mehta DI. Assessment of the prevalence of microaspiration by gastric pepsin in the airway of ventilated children. Acta Paediatr. 2008 Jan;97(1):55-60. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2007.00578.x. Epub 2007 Dec 10. PubMed 18076720 ↗
  • Apfelbaum JL, Caplan RA, Barker SJ, Connis RT, Cowles C, Ehrenwerth J, Nickinovich DG, Pritchard D, Roberson DW, Caplan RA, Barker SJ, Connis RT, Cowles C, de Richemond AL, Ehrenwerth J, Nickinovich DG, Pritchard D, Roberson DW, Wolf GL; American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Operating Room Fires. Practice advisory for the prevention and management of operating room fires: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Operating Room Fires. Anesthesiology. 2013 Feb;118(2):271-90. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31827773d2. No abstract available. PubMed 23287706 ↗
  • Black AE, Hatch DJ, Nauth-Misir N. Complications of nasotracheal intubation in neonates, infants and children: a review of 4 years' experience in a children's hospital. Br J Anaesth. 1990 Oct;65(4):461-7. doi: 10.1093/bja/65.4.461. PubMed 2248814 ↗
  • Dullenkopf A, Schmitz A, Gerber AC, Weiss M. Tracheal sealing characteristics of pediatric cuffed tracheal tubes. Paediatr Anaesth. 2004 Oct;14(10):825-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2004.01316.x. PubMed 15385010 ↗
  • Seegobin RD, van Hasselt GL. Endotracheal cuff pressure and tracheal mucosal blood flow: endoscopic study of effects of four large volume cuffs. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1984 Mar 31;288(6422):965-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.288.6422.965. PubMed 6423162 ↗
  • Liu J, Zhang X, Gong W, Li S, Wang F, Fu S, Zhang M, Hang Y. Correlations between controlled endotracheal tube cuff pressure and postprocedural complications: a multicenter study. Anesth Analg. 2010 Nov;111(5):1133-7. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181f2ecc7. Epub 2010 Aug 24. PubMed 20736432 ↗
  • Borhazowal R, Harde M, Bhadade R, Dave S, Aswar SG. Comparison between Two Endotracheal Tube Cuff Inflation Methods; Just-Seal Vs. Stethoscope-Guided. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017 Jun;11(6):UC01-UC03. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/26301.10017. Epub 2017 Jun 1. PubMed 28764268 ↗
  • Hoffman RJ, Parwani V, Hahn IH. Experienced emergency medicine physicians cannot safely inflate or estimate endotracheal tube cuff pressure using standard techniques. Am J Emerg Med. 2006 Mar;24(2):139-43. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2005.07.016. PubMed 16490640 ↗
  • Felten ML, Schmautz E, Delaporte-Cerceau S, Orliaguet GA, Carli PA. Endotracheal tube cuff pressure is unpredictable in children. Anesth Analg. 2003 Dec;97(6):1612-1616. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000087882.04234.11. PubMed 14633529 ↗
  • Kumar RD, Hirsch NP. Clinical evaluation of stethoscope-guided inflation of tracheal tube cuffs. Anaesthesia. 2011 Nov;66(11):1012-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06853.x. Epub 2011 Aug 18. PubMed 21851343 ↗
  • Almarakbi WA, Kaki AM. Tracheal tube cuff inflation guided by pressure volume loop closure associated with lower postoperative cuff-related complications: Prospective, randomized clinical trial. Saudi J Anaesth. 2014 Jul;8(3):328-34. doi: 10.4103/1658-354X.136422. PubMed 25191181 ↗
  • Duracher C, Schmautz E, Martinon C, Faivre J, Carli P, Orliaguet G. Evaluation of cuffed tracheal tube size predicted using the Khine formula in children. Paediatr Anaesth. 2008 Feb;18(2):113-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2007.02382.x. PubMed 18184241 ↗
  • Khine HH, Corddry DH, Kettrick RG, Martin TM, McCloskey JJ, Rose JB, Theroux MC, Zagnoev M. Comparison of cuffed and uncuffed endotracheal tubes in young children during general anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1997 Mar;86(3):627-31; discussion 27A. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199703000-00015. PubMed 9066329 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 11, 2020, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03902756
Lead sponsor
Ramathibodi Hospital
Responsible party
Witchaya Supaopaspan (Principal investigator, Ramathibodi Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Apr 4, 2019
Start date
Jun 5, 2018
Primary completion
May 30, 2019
Completion
May 30, 2019
Last update
Mar 11, 2020

Study contacts

Witchaya Supaopaspan, medical
principal investigator · Mahidol University

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion