Ambulatory GI anesthesia with no anesthesia equipment?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

ghostman

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Messages
296
Reaction score
8
I've only done anesthesia in big hospitals where the GI suite (colonoscopies, endoscopies) is equipped with an anesthesia machine, all associated monitors, electronic charting, etc. I realize I don't use most of the equipment except for the monitors and EtCO2 monitors for these cases, but the equipment is there to go full GA if things go wrong.

I'm now looking for jobs and there is one location that requires GI anesthesia at their ambulatory GI suite, all ASA 1 and 2 patients. The suite is not equipped with really any anesthesia equipment. A few monitors for vitals, but no anesthesia machine, no capnography, no electronic charting. It's basically pushing propofol and recording their vitals. They already have an anesthesia provider working there part time.

Would you be comfortable performing GI anesthesia in that environment? What would they need in terms of equipment to make you comfortable working there?

Members don't see this ad.
 
No anesthesia machine and paper charting is fine. You must have capnography, ambu bag, and standard airway equipment (oral airways, LMAs, ETTs, blades of all sizes, and succinylcholine).

This is assuming the patients are all ASA 1/2 and are being pre-screened by an anesthesiologist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 11 users
I've only done anesthesia in big hospitals where the GI suite (colonoscopies, endoscopies) is equipped with an anesthesia machine, all associated monitors, electronic charting, etc. I realize I don't use most of the equipment except for the monitors and EtCO2 monitors for these cases, but the equipment is there to go full GA if things go wrong.

I'm now looking for jobs and there is one location that requires GI anesthesia at their ambulatory GI suite, all ASA 1 and 2 patients. The suite is not equipped with really any anesthesia equipment. A few monitors for vitals, but no anesthesia machine, no capnography, no electronic charting. It's basically pushing propofol and recording their vitals. They already have an anesthesia provider working there part time.

Would you be comfortable performing GI anesthesia in that environment? What would they need in terms of equipment to make you comfortable working there?
MUST have ETCO2. Paper records are easier and are standard for most ASCs. NO ETCO2 is not and I would be surprised if they are truly without it..

MUST have SUX.

MUST have glidescope/blades/tubes/lmas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
Members don't see this ad :)
No anesthesia machine and paper charting is fine. You must have capnography, ambu bag, and standard airway equipment (oral airways, LMAs, ETTs, blades of all sizes, and succinylcholine).

This is assuming the patients are all ASA 1/2 and are being pre-screened by an anesthesiologist.
Would you not do ASA 3 in this setting?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Offsite anesthesia is all airway; and for that reason most medical malpractice from airway complications happens in the off sites. You can get a patient with significant comorbidities through a 10 minute MAC if you dose appropriately and have some kind of pressor medication. I will echo above that the most important thing involves the need for rescue mask ventilation, and or intubation. Also its 2021, who doesn't have ETCO2? Even the old ass philips monitors have a port for an ETCO2 cord. A patient with a BMI over 40 automatically is ASA 3, we all know we get plenty of those. Also they have an ambu bag right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Why are we always getting screwed? Seriously. Does a surgeon or proceceduralist not have equipment? What stuff are they willing to not have? Crazy we can’t even get basic things like a machine, ETCO2? For goodness sake. We are just expected to work like back in the 1800s with our pullover circuit or something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Why are we always getting screwed? Seriously. Does a surgeon or proceceduralist not have equipment? What stuff are they willing to not have? Crazy we can’t even get basic things like a machine, ETCO2? For goodness sake. We are just expected to work like back in the 1800s with our pullover circuit or something.
Because we are a service to those who do surgery or procedures. Sadly we really have little say.
 
Because we are a service to those who do surgery or procedures. Sadly we really have little say.

U can talk with your feet. Walk away from places like this, unless u want to be on the news when a bad outcome happens. Not worth the risk practicing below the standard of care
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 5 users
U can talk with your feet. Walk away from places like this, unless u want to be on the news when a bad outcome happens. Not worth the risk practicing below the standard of care

Yep. Whenever we are about to start at a new outpatient place, we do a site visit to make sure they meet all our requirements. Most places welcome our guidance but we have had a couple places use other groups because we are “difficult to work with.”
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
If they have sux then they need to have dantrolene. Isn't this part of what went wrong with joan rivers? (no sux on-site because they didn't want to pay for an MH kit)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Agree with the majority here. ETCO2/bp/SpO2/ecg/temp capability, ambu bag, O2 tank, sux/dantrolene. Throw a few LMAs and one of the portable video laryngoscopes in your bag on days you go there if they don’t have a glidescope. A real understanding on their part of what ASA 1/2 looks like (or a willingness on your part to cancel day of if they book BMI 50 patients on home O2).

This is the minimum setup it would take for me to work somewhere.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Offsite anesthesia is all airway; and for that reason most medical malpractice from airway complications happens in the off sites. You can get a patient with significant comorbidities through a 10 minute MAC if you dose appropriately and have some kind of pressor medication. I will echo above that the most important thing involves the need for rescue mask ventilation, and or intubation. Also its 2021, who doesn't have ETCO2? Even the old ass philips monitors have a port for an ETCO2 cord. A patient with a BMI over 40 automatically is ASA 3, we all know we get plenty of those. Also they have an ambu bag right?
I give a 3 for class II obesity and onward, BMI>35
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
MUST have ETCO2. Paper records are easier and are standard for most ASCs. NO ETCO2 is not and I would be surprised if they are truly without it..

MUST have SUX.

MUST have glidescope/blades/tubes/lmas.

Disagree with the “must have sux.”. would be OK with zemuron plus suggamadex available. That way don’t have to deal with Dantrolene MH cart etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If they have sux then they need to have dantrolene. Isn't this part of what went wrong with joan rivers? (no sux on-site because they didn't want to pay for an MH kit)

Joan rivers happened because of an ent doing an unnecessary vocal cord procedure and a gi doc that owned his facility.
 
  • Hmm
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Joan rivers happened because of an ent doing an unnecessary vocal cord procedure and a gi doc that owned his facility.
i agree, but wasn't a component of her death laryngospasm from VC bx under mac and a lack of sux? (and subsequent inability to intubate or ventilate). i thought i read this somewhere.
 
i agree, but wasn't a component of her death laryngospasm from VC bx under mac and a lack of sux? (and subsequent inability to intubate or ventilate). i thought i read this somewhere.
I don't remember that it was specifically detailed but that seems the most likely explanation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I wonder how fast a mini dose of roc would take to work? Or are u talking about giving a lot

1.2/kg. Just slam it in and tube. If it doesn't work, you were already in a can't ventilate can't intubate situation anyway. Also you can give a megadose of sugammadex to reverse. But it's the hypnotic that will be the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
1.2/kg. Just slam it in and tube. If it doesn't work, you were already in a can't ventilate can't intubate situation anyway. Also you can give a megadose of sugammadex to reverse. But it's the hypnotic that will be the problem.
Just give more propofol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
1.2/kg. Just slam it in and tube. If it doesn't work, you were already in a can't ventilate can't intubate situation anyway. Also you can give a megadose of sugammadex to reverse. But it's the hypnotic that will be the problem.

Ok, wanted to clarify that point. IMO Not a great workaround for not wanting to carry MH kit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
So, anyone have insights on what GI suites do that are outpatient and RN sedation only? From what I understand that is the majority of scopes out there. All I am familiar with are the sicker ones that need anesthesia to help. Those places with just fent/versed certainly don't stock advanced airway equipment? I don't think they even require EtCO2 monitoring.
 
Joan rivers happened because of an ent doing an unnecessary vocal cord procedure and a gi doc that owned his facility.
Joan Rivers happened because "these things do happen", even in the best-triaged ASA 1/2 patients.




One can either shrug one's shoulders and pocket the money, or not accept anything less than being prepared for the worst, in every case, in every location. Only the latter is compatible with "physician", in my book.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
So, anyone have insights on what GI suites do that are outpatient and RN sedation only? From what I understand that is the majority of scopes out there. All I am familiar with are the sicker ones that need anesthesia to help. Those places with just fent/versed certainly don't stock advanced airway equipment? I don't think they even require EtCO2 monitoring.

At my institution there still had to be some MD on site who orders meds and is ‘airway certified’ for sedation cases - this may be an internist/pediatrician, but they are on site. I imagine the GI themself plays this role for outpatient GI?

Biggest reason we need this equipment is we are held to a higher standard and expected to be able to provide all levels of anesthesia. We are more expensive because we have less complications and are expected to be able to do GA and bail ourselves out if necessary. Medicolegally I don’t think you can even justify doing more than minimal sedation without ETCO2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
So, anyone have insights on what GI suites do that are outpatient and RN sedation only? From what I understand that is the majority of scopes out there. All I am familiar with are the sicker ones that need anesthesia to help. Those places with just fent/versed certainly don't stock advanced airway equipment? I don't think they even require EtCO2 monitoring.

Conscious sedation with versed fentanyl (both with specific antagonists available) should not be conflated with IVGA with propofol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
U can talk with your feet. Walk away from places like this, unless u want to be on the news when a bad outcome happens. Not worth the risk practicing below the standard of care
Respectfully, an anesthesia machine is not standard of care for an endoscopy center IF they're taking care of appropriately selected patients with the appropriate equipment and meds on site. We do hundreds of GI cases a week in 3 hospitals and several ambulatory centers. 80% of those or more are done in a room without an anesthesia machine. We use EtCO2 monitoring on every case, and have the full complement of drugs including sux and a fully stocked MH cart and videolaryngosopes, even at our ambulatory centers. Our anesthesia cart in the room has every drug our OR carts have. An anesthesia machine doesn't add anything to the mix except a ventilator.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Respectfully, an anesthesia machine is not standard of care for an endoscopy center IF they're taking care of appropriately selected patients with the appropriate equipment and meds on site. We do hundreds of GI cases a week in 3 hospitals and several ambulatory centers. 80% of those or more are done in a room without an anesthesia machine. We use EtCO2 monitoring on every case, and have the full complement of drugs including sux and a fully stocked MH cart and videolaryngosopes, even at our ambulatory centers. Our anesthesia cart in the room has every drug our OR carts have. An anesthesia machine doesn't add anything to the mix except a ventilator.

Agree with everything in your post but I’m not reading in @coffeebythelake’s post that an anesthesia machine is mandatory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
100% need etCO2, LMAs, tubes, blades, boogie, ambu, and some sort of back up glide scope available. Wouldn’t feel comfortable doing GA cases without these available.

sux I think would make me feel better, I’m +\- whether it’s absolutely essential.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Not an anesthesiologist but I don’t see why the cost of a MH cart should stop you from having succ available. My understanding is MH is a 1 in 10k-100k event. Even if it’s 100x more likely with succ that’s 1/100 or 1/1000. If succ is only being used in worse case scenarios which are exceptionally rare then by definition MH would be much more rare.

so yes you could be up **** creek if you didn’t have an MH cart. But you already would have been up **** creek if you didn’t have the succ, so that makes no sense to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
@DoctwoB just to explain where @okayplayer is coming from: while your point is well taken, preparation for rare and catastrophic events is a fundamental underpinning of our specialty. Furthermore, having dantrolene available at any facility where sux or volatile is in use is considered standard of care by our professional and credentialing bodies.

Not to mention, if MH is a 1:10,000 event and you work in a very high volume G.I. suite, odds are that you will see it at least once in your career. Easy to dismiss MH as a rare and theoretical event until it’s happening in front of you- in case you haven’t ever seen it (yet), it is BAD. One (preventable) dead patient is still a dead patient
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
@DoctwoB just to explain where @okayplayer is coming from: while your point is well taken, preparation for rare and catastrophic events is a fundamental underpinning of our specialty. Furthermore, having dantrolene available at any facility where sux or volatile is in use is considered standard of care by our professional and credentialing bodies.

Not to mention, if MH is a 1:10,000 event and you work in a very high volume G.I. suite, odds are that you will see it at least once in your career. Easy to dismiss MH as a rare and theoretical event until it’s happening in front of you- in case you haven’t ever seen it (yet), it is BAD. One (preventable) dead patient is still a dead patient
@DoctwoB would seem to have a point, for the non-anesthesiologist. If one uses sux only in 1 out of 1000 GI patients, and the incidence of MH is 1:2000-1:3000 (based on a French study), we are preparing for a 1:2,000,000 GI patients event. If we use some American outpatient surgery numbers, it's 0.31:100,000, or 3 in 1,000,000 outpatient surgical patients (with a much higher prevalence of triggering agents than in the GI suite).

The statistical chances of having MH in a GI suite are infinitesimal. However, the consequences are grave, up to the patient's death, which makes that 4,000 dollar-investment every 3 years a cheap insurance policy in a developed country.

For a more formal analysis, see:

 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Just to add/supplement @DoctwoB from more societal point of view. We already established asa 1 or 2 patients at surgical centers. How do you plan on explaining their “healthy” loved one died because you elect to save a few dollars?
 
Disagree with the “must have sux.”. would be OK with zemuron plus suggamadex available. That way don’t have to deal with Dantrolene MH cart etc.

Was thinking about this now that we live in a time where Sugammadex is everywhere. I’d still rather have sux/dantrolene on site, but I have to say if I had that 16 mg/kg quantity of Sugammadex immediately available (along with a handful of vials of rocuronium and a TOF monitor immediately available), that might be enough for me too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I’d be fine to do this setup with rocc and sugammadex available. I may even prefer it due to the difficulties of setup/cost/maintenance of a MH cart.

The #1 reason I’d never get involved here is that it’s anesthesia for GI and only GI. So Nope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Was thinking about this now that we live in a time where Sugammadex is everywhere. I’d still rather have sux/dantrolene on site, but I have to say if I had that 16 mg/kg quantity of Sugammadex immediately available (along with a handful of vials of rocuronium and a TOF monitor immediately available), that might be enough for me too.

In a perfect world, I would also prefer sux, MH cart, Dantrolene, etc. I would also prefer every procedure done in or adjacent to a tertiary care center.

In case you haven't noticed, the world ain't perfect. IMO, this is solid and safe and I would have no problem with my family member having a procedure in this type set up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Interesting letter addressing the likelihood of triggering MH with low dose sux alone and no volatile.




“We read with interest the study by Larach et al.,1 which performed extensive and complex analyses of three databases (i.e., Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group, the North American Malignant Hyperthermia Registry, and the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project) as well as performed a systematic review of literature. One of the conclusions of the study was that succinylcholine alone without volatile anesthetics may trigger malignant hyperthermia (MH). The authors seem to allude that this finding negates the Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia recommendation2 that permits Class B ambulatory facilities to stock succinylcholine for rescue of laryngospasm without stocking dantrolene. However, the Larach et al. study1 has significant limitations, particularly the fact that the analyses did not include data from Class B facilities or the use of succinylcholine for laryngospasm. The succinylcholine dose used for situations assessed in this study (i.e., possible difficult airway or electroconvulsive therapy) is generally much higher, and extrapolating the conclusions to low-dose (20 to 30 mg) succinylcholine commonly used to treat laryngospasm may be inappropriate. Of note, there are no reports of MH with low-dose succinylcholine. Also, as stated in the accompanying editorial by Hopkins,3 “the evidence presented in this article is insufficient to convince me that succinylcholine in the absence of volatile anesthetics can trigger a life-threatening progressive hypermetabolic response in MH–susceptible patients...”
Class B facilities provide for minimally or moderately invasive procedures not requiring general and/or regional anesthesia. These facilities, which are growing in number, typically do not stock dantrolene because they do not use (or have the ability to use) volatile anesthetics. To avoid the costs associated with carrying and replacing dantrolene, they often elect not to stock succinylcholine, as its presence is perceived to mandate the availability of dantrolene. Given that the use of succinylcholine for laryngospasm is under reported, although there is a high likelihood of overdiagnosis of MH, the prevalence of MH is credibly significantly lower than the incidence of laryngospasm, which makes this a significant patient safety issue. The Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia position statement acknowledges this reality. Therefore, offering the alternative to stocking succinylcholine without dantrolene is prudent from patient safety and cost-effectiveness perspectives.
In summary, the evidence presented in the Larach et al.1 study is not enough to contradict the extensive arguments put forth in the pragmatic Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia recommendations.2 In the era of escalating healthcare costs and changing surgical environments, any prudent guideline should balance the potential benefits of a recommendation with costs and risk mitigation. It should also be noted that the Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia recommendation does not extend to the pediatric age group and facilities that provide inhalation anesthesia or use of succinylcholine during induction of general anesthesia. Furthermore, this recommendation emphasizes precautions such as the need for MH drills and transfer arrangements.”
 
SAMBA statement. I think they and @DoctwoB make a good point.



“Procedures in class B ambulatory facilities are performed exclusively with oral or IV sedative-hypnotics and/or analgesics. These facilities typically do not stock dantrolene because no known triggers of malignant hyperthermia (ie, inhaled anesthetics and succinylcholine) are available. This article argues that, in the absence of succinylcholine, the morbidity and mortality from laryngospasm can be significant, indeed, higher than the unlikely scenario of succinylcholine-triggered malignant hyperthermia. The Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia (SAMBA) position statement for the use of succinylcholine for emergency airway management is presented.
Ambulatory or office-based facilities are classified, in general, based on the type of sedation/analgesia or anesthesia provided. Class A facilities provide for minor procedures performed under topical or local anesthesia (excluding spinal and epidural routes) without sedation. Class B facilities provide for minimally or moderately invasive surgical procedures performed with oral, parenteral, or IV sedation and/or analgesic or dissociative drugs. Class C facilities provide for major surgical procedures that require general and/or regional anesthesia. A growing number of ambulatory and office-based facilities (typically class B facilities) are performing procedures exclusively with IV anesthetics, without the availability of an anesthesia machine (ie, without inhaled anesthetics). These facilities typically do not stock dantrolene because no known triggers of malignant hyperthermia (MH) are used. Accordingly, succinylcholine is also not available, because its presence could be perceived to mandate the availability of dantrolene.1
In this article, we contend that, in the absence of succinylcholine, the morbidity and mortality from laryngospasm can be significant; indeed, higher than the unlikely scenario of succinylcholine-triggered MH. Therefore, if succinylcholine is stocked and its availability is strictly limited solely for emergency use only, the mandate for carrying dantrolene in facilities that do not have inhaled anesthetics is unnecessary and may, in fact, compromise patient safety.

LARYNGOSPASM​

In an outpatient setting, respiratory or airway complications, including laryngospasm, are the predominant etiologies of emergencies.2Laryngospasm is an anesthetic emergency that, if not promptly and effectively managed, may lead to significant morbidity and mortality. The overall incidence of laryngospasm ranges between 0.1% and 5%, depending on the surgical procedure, patient’s age, preexisting conditions, and anesthetic technique.3–7 In an observational trial of 136,929 patients, Olsson and Hallen8 found an incidence of 8.6/1000 (0.86%) in adults and 27.6/1000 (2.76%) in children. Another study reported an incidence of laryngospasm of 189 cases/4000 (4.7%) patients.3 Of note, one can safely assume that the incidence of laryngospasm is most likely underreported.
Initial treatment of laryngospasm includes cessation of stimulation by removing any triggering factor, administration of 100% oxygen, and relieving any supraglottic component of airway obstruction by applying jaw thrust/chin lift and continuous positive airway pressure. In addition, the depth of anesthesia may be deepened with an IV anesthetic (ie, propofol). Of note, administration of low-dose (20–30 mg, IV) succinylcholine is widely accepted as the most effective treatment for laryngospasm refractory to conservative management.3 It is reported that approximately 25% to 50% of such cases receive succinylcholine.5Delay in using succinylcholine can be associated with significant hypoxia.

MALIGNANT HYPERTHERMIA​

The incidence of MH in the outpatient setting is estimated to be 0.18/100,000 to 0.31/100,000.9–11Given the potential lethality of MH and the difficulty in screening for it, the Malignant Hyperthermia Association of the United States (MHAUS) recommends that dantrolene be stocked at ambulatory surgical centers where triggering agents (ie, inhaled anesthetics and succinylcholine) are used.1 Although stocking dantrolene in an ambulatory surgery center is reported to be cost-effective, most class B facilities decline to stock it because of high carrying cost.10Most of these facilities, therefore, do not stock succinylcholine, because it is considered as a MH trigger.
The triggers for MH include inhaled anesthetics and succinylcholine. The combination of both an inhaled anesthetic and succinylcholine is considered to be the most potent trigger of MH.12–15 However, succinylcholine as the sole trigger of life-threatening MH remains controversial.12–15Several multicenter studies have found that succinylcholine was the sole trigger of MH in only 0.7% to 1% of cases.14,16 Thus, the incidence of MH with the use of succinylcholine alone would be approximately 1% of the overall incidence of MH in an ambulatory setting. Therefore, although addition of succinylcholine to inhaled anesthetic accelerates the onset and potentiates the severity of MH, the likelihood of isolated succinylcholine-induced MH appears to be extremely low. In addition, to our knowledge, there are no reported cases of MH after administration of low doses of succinylcholine.
Since 2000, the Florida Board of Medicine has required succinylcholine in level II offices (these facilities do not stock inhaled anesthetics similar to class B facilities) without concomitantly mandating dantrolene.17 There have been no reported cases of MH. In addition, for several years, the American Association for Accreditation of Ambulatory Surgery Facilities (AAAASF) has allowed its accredited facilities that do not have inhaled anesthetics to stock succinylcholine for emergency airway rescue without requiring the availability of dantrolene.18
High-dose rocuronium with sugammadex reversal has been recommended as an alternative to succinylcholine19; however, clinical experience with this approach is limited. Furthermore, a recent analysis suggested that rescue reversal of rocuronium with sugammadex might not provide immediate return to spontaneous ventilation in the “cannot intubate, cannot ventilate” situation.20
Table 1.
Table 1.:
Protocol for Use of Succinylcholine for Emergency Airway Rescue (Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia [SAMBA] and American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] Ambulatory Surgical Care Committee)
In summary, laryngospasm is a common anesthetic emergency that can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Given that the prevalence of laryngospasm leading to morbidity and mortality is significantly higher than MH, it is necessary to reassess the mandate that dantrolene be available when succinylcholine is stocked only for emergency use. The Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia (SAMBA) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Ambulatory Surgical Care Committee have proposed a protocol for the use of succinylcholine for emergency airway management (Table 1).”
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Respectfully, an anesthesia machine is not standard of care for an endoscopy center IF they're taking care of appropriately selected patients with the appropriate equipment and meds on site. We do hundreds of GI cases a week in 3 hospitals and several ambulatory centers. 80% of those or more are done in a room without an anesthesia machine. We use EtCO2 monitoring on every case, and have the full complement of drugs including sux and a fully stocked MH cart and videolaryngosopes, even at our ambulatory centers. Our anesthesia cart in the room has every drug our OR carts have. An anesthesia machine doesn't add anything to the mix except a ventilator.

I never said anything about an anesthesia machine? I sedate patients in the office all the time without one.
 
@DoctwoB just to explain where @okayplayer is coming from: while your point is well taken, preparation for rare and catastrophic events is a fundamental underpinning of our specialty. Furthermore, having dantrolene available at any facility where sux or volatile is in use is considered standard of care by our professional and credentialing bodies.

Not to mention, if MH is a 1:10,000 event and you work in a very high volume G.I. suite, odds are that you will see it at least once in your career. Easy to dismiss MH as a rare and theoretical event until it’s happening in front of you- in case you haven’t ever seen it (yet), it is BAD. One (preventable) dead patient is still a dead patient

My point isn't that we shouldn't prepare for rare events. It is that you are already not preparing for it by not having sux. If things go badly, what would you rather have. No sux? or sux and no MH cart?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
To play devil's advocate: how many times have you intubated a GI case?
Me? A big 0 for thousands of cases... (channeling my inner Blade) once i masked a couple of breaths with the ambu bag.
With appropriate technique (low and slow) you really only need a little oxygen via nasal canula and a pulse ox.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top