Pitfalls in the Use of the Flexible Bronchoscope in Pediatric Patients: INSTRUMENTATION FOR ENDOSCOPY
use of inappropriate instruments for bronchoscopy is a major potential pitfall. Flexible bronchoscopes at least partially obstruct the airway, and the instrument used should be small enough to allow adequate ventilation if possible. On the other hand, it is also possible to employ an instrument which is inappropriately small for the task at hand. The “ultra- thin” flexible bronchoscopes do not have suction channels, and it may therefore be very difficult to adequately visualize the airways with such an instrument if there are excessive secretions. The bronchoscopist must be certain that the appropriate structures have been adequately visualized.
A more insidious problem is the use of a flexible bronchoscope when a rigid instrument should be used instead. While in general I believe that the flexible instruments are superior for diagnostic purposes, there are several distinct situations in which use of the rigid bronchoscope may be essential to reach an accurate diagnosis. The rigid instrument approaches the glottis from the anterior aspect, and it is often difficult to adequately evaluate the anterior aspect of the glottis with a rigid instrument. On the other hand, the flexible instrument approaches the glottis (via the transnasal route) from the posterior aspect, and must be flexed anteriorly to view the glottis. Thus, it may be difficult to adequately evaluate the posterior aspect of the glottis with a flexible instrument. Therefore, the examination of a patient with suspected H-type tracheoesophageal fistula or a suspected laryngeal cleft is probably best performed with a rigid bronchoscope. The lens of the flexible bronchoscope is at the extreme distal end of the instrument; this makes it very difficult to manipulate the tissues under direct vision, as can be done with a rigid bronchoscope or laryngoscope. Vocal cord movement is most appropriately evaluated under topical anesthesia (and sedation) rather than general anesthesia, and the flexible instruments are usually adequate. However, if the vocal cords do not abduct, the problem may be either paralysis or interarytenoid fixation. These possibilities can best be distinguished with a rigid instrument, since the cords can be separated by the tip of the bronchoscope while their movement is observed through the telescope.







We showed that continuous postural oscillation decreased the incidence of LRTI and pneumonia and shortened the median hospital stay for victims of nonpenetrating trauma. Patients in the control arm received standard nursing care, including turning from side to side every 2 h (although the efficacy of this effort to turn patients was sometimes compromised by the presence of skeletal traction devices). Although the mean ISS and APACHE-II scores were somewhat lower for the patients randomized to the study bed, the differences were small and not statistically signif-icant. It is unlikely, therefore, that differences between groups in severity of injury or physiologic derangement were responsible for the observed differences in incidence of LRTI and pneumonia. More patients with major head trauma were randomized to the control group, but it is unlikely that this can explain the observed effect of postural oscillation, since logistic regression analyses showed that treatment with a conventional hospital bed remained a significant risk factor for LRTI and pneumonia, even when severity of injury (ISS) and major head trauma were simultaneously considered in the model. Furthermore, when patients with and without major head trauma were analyzed separately, the conclusions were similar, although when LRTI was the outcome variable, the beneficial effect of the oscillating bed barely missed achieving statistical significance, possibly because of inadequate sample size.

