Clinical trial NCT03403192: EZ-blocker Versus Left Sided Double Lumen Tube in Adult Patients for Thoracic Surgery
Official title: A Comparison of Positional Stability: the EZ-blocker Versus Left Sided Double Lumen Tube in Adult Patients for Thoracic Surgery
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Phase: NA
Conditions: Thoracic Injuries
Keywords: EZ Blocker
DLT
Double Lumen Tube
Thoracic Surgery
Lead sponsor: Wake Forest University Health Sciences
Sponsor class: OTHER
First posted: 2018-01-18
Enrollment: 163
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Maximum age (years): 80
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Intervention model description: The objective of this study is to evaluate the positional stability and quality of lung isolation provided by the EZ-blocker compared to a DLT for both right and left sided thoracic surgery
Primary purpose: SUPPORTIVE_CARE

Brief summary: The objective of this study is to evaluate the positional stability and quality of lung isolation provided by the EZ-blocker compared to a DLT for both right and left sided thoracic surgery.

An additional objective will be to assess time to placement of both devices and other significant clinical differences between these two approaches to placement of the bronchial blocker (BB) including airway injury and post-operatives sore throat, post-operative hoarseness, Additionally we would like to examine the preoperative high resolution CT imaging data to determine if there are anatomic landmarks that may potentially inform the appropriateness or inappropriateness of choosing an EZ-blocker or left sided DLT.

Detailed description: One lung ventilation (OLV) is frequently used in thoracic surgery to promote surgical exposure and improve operative conditions. At this time, there are two different approaches to OLV in routine use in adult thoracic surgery. One approach is to use of a double lumen tube (DLT). The other approach is to use a bronchial blocker (BB). Currently there are several different types of bronchial BBs on the market.

The EZ-Blocker essentially functions as a bronchial blocker with a 7-Fr shaft with two separate occlusive balloons coming off this shaft in a "Y" configuration designed to rest on the carina. Once anchored in place the operator can choose to inflate one of the two occlusive balloons to isolate one main stem bronchus or the other.

A number of studies have been performed comparing BBs to DLTs looking at time and ease of placement, differences in quality of lung isolation, and incidence of sore throat, hoarseness, and other morbidity associated with placement. A recent meta-analysis published by Clayton-Smith et al found that BBs are associated with fewer airway injuries when compared to DLTs. They found the quality of isolation to be equivalent between BBs and DLTs. While quality of isolation over all may be comparable, it has been demonstrated in several studies that positional stability of bronchial blockers such as the Arndt or Cohen, is frequently inferior to that of a DLT.

At this time, there are a small number of trials looking at the use of the EZ-blocker in adult patients. In one study published in 2013 the EZ-blocker was compared to the Cohen Flex-Tip blocker. In this study they found that time to place the EZ-blocker was in fact shorter and that overall the number of repositioning required was less with the EZ-blocker. In 2013, a study was published by Mourisse et al which compared DLT to the EZ-blocker. In this study they found initial malposition of both devices to be fairly equivalent, and time to placement was longer with the EZ-blocker. They also found more tracheal and bronchial injuries in the DLT group, but importantly they found that positional stability was equivalent. In both of these studies however they did not design their studies to effectively differentiate between right and left sided procedures when quantifying the need for BB repositioning. Because the takeoff of the right upper lobe bronchus is sometimes adjacent to, or proximal to the carina, it can impede effective isolation with a BB. Therefore, claims of positional stability may rely heavily on the laterality of the procedure, with right sided isolation being significantly more labile than left sided especially with respect to isolation using a BB.

According to the manufactures recommendations the EZ-blocker is placed through a Y-piece adaptor included with the blocker kit. A flexible fiberoptic bronchoscope (FFB) is placed in a separate limb of this Y-piece and this fed through alongside the EZ-blocker to visualize and confirm placement of the BB. The balloon is then inflated typically under direct vision to occlude that bronchus thus isolating that lung hopefully achieving full lung isolation.

In conclusion then, the study team feels that the potential morbidity of a DLT in terms of the potential for airway injury when compared to a BB suggests that further exploration of the possibility of equivalent positional stability between these devices is necessary. The team also feels that it is necessary to delineate the impact of laterality on the effectiveness of one technique for isolation versus the other.

In addition to this if there is a difference in stability in cases where right sided isolation via the EZ-blocker fails in the setting of multiple repositions or out and out failure the team would like to examine the preoperative high resolution CT data to determine if there are anatomic measurement which could potentially inform the appropriateness or inappropriateness of choosing a DLT over an EZ-blocker.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* Patients greater than 18 and 80 years of age scheduled for thoracoscopic surgery or thoracotomy requiring lung isolation
* Patient presenting as an outpatient for elective thoracic surgery
* In patients scheduled for thoracic surgery.

Exclusion Criteria:

* History of difficult airway/intubation
* Patients suspected to have a difficult airway.
* Morbid obesity BMI \>39
* Pregnancy
* Emergency status of surgery
* Thoracic surgery requiring a right sided double lumen tube

Primary outcomes:
measure: Number of Double Lumen Tube (DLT) or Bronchial Blocker (BB) Replacements
timeFrame: End of surgical procedure
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Time it Takes to Place for Double Lumen Tube (DLT) and EZ
timeFrame: End of surgical procedure
measure: Quality of Lung Isolation Between Devices
timeFrame: End of surgical procedure
measure: Side Effects of Devices
timeFrame: 2 days post operation
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Winston-Salem
country: United States
facility: Wake Forest Baptist Hospital
state: North Carolina
Study officials:
affiliation: Assistant Professor
name: Benjamin N Morris, MD
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References:
citation: Mungroop HE, Wai PT, Morei MN, Loef BG, Epema AH. Lung isolation with a new Y-shaped endobronchial blocking device, the EZ-Blocker. Br J Anaesth. 2010 Jan;104(1):119-20. doi: 10.1093/bja/aep353. No abstract available.
citation: Dumans-Nizard V, Liu N, Laloe PA, Fischler M. A comparison of the deflecting-tip bronchial blocker with a wire-guided blocker or left-sided double-lumen tube. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2009 Aug;23(4):501-5. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2009.02.002. Epub 2009 Apr 10.
citation: Campos JH, Hallam EA, Van Natta T, Kernstine KH. Devices for lung isolation used by anesthesiologists with limited thoracic experience: comparison of double-lumen endotracheal tube, Univent torque control blocker, and Arndt wire-guided endobronchial blocker. Anesthesiology. 2006 Feb;104(2):261-6, discussion 5A. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200602000-00010.
citation: Knoll H, Ziegeler S, Schreiber JU, Buchinger H, Bialas P, Semyonov K, Graeter T, Mencke T. Airway injuries after one-lung ventilation: a comparison between double-lumen tube and endobronchial blocker: a randomized, prospective, controlled trial. Anesthesiology. 2006 Sep;105(3):471-7. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200609000-00009.
citation: Clayton-Smith A, Bennett K, Alston RP, Adams G, Brown G, Hawthorne T, Hu M, Sinclair A, Tan J. A Comparison of the Efficacy and Adverse Effects of Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tubes and Bronchial Blockers in Thoracic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2015 Aug;29(4):955-66. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2014.11.017. Epub 2014 Dec 2.
citation: Kus A, Hosten T, Gurkan Y, Gul Akgul A, Solak M, Toker K. A comparison of the EZ-Blocker with a Cohen Flex-Tip blocker for one-lung ventilation. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2014 Aug;28(4):896-9. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2013.02.006. Epub 2013 Aug 16.
citation: Mourisse J, Liesveld J, Verhagen A, van Rooij G, van der Heide S, Schuurbiers-Siebers O, Van der Heijden E. Efficiency, efficacy, and safety of EZ-blocker compared with left-sided double-lumen tube for one-lung ventilation. Anesthesiology. 2013 Mar;118(3):550-61. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182834f2d.
citation: Piccioni F, Vecchi I, Spinelli E, Previtali P, Langer M. Extraluminal EZ-blocker Placement for One-lung Ventilation in Pediatric Thoracic Surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2015 Dec;29(6):e71-3. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2015.05.200. Epub 2015 May 27. No abstract available.
citation: Templeton TW, Downard MG, Simpson CR, Zeller KA, Templeton LB, Bryan YF. Bending the rules: a novel approach to placement and retrospective experience with the 5 French Arndt endobronchial blocker in children <2 years. Paediatr Anaesth. 2016 May;26(5):512-20. doi: 10.1111/pan.12882. Epub 2016 Mar 9.