Airway management in Pierre Robin sequence,☆☆,

Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Washington, D.C., Sept. 29–Oct. 2, 1996.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0194-5998(98)70232-3Get rights and content

Abstract

There is a great deal of controversy regarding the long-term management of airway obstruction in children with Pierre Robin sequence. All 23 pediatric otolaryngology fellowship programs were surveyed to determine their current practice patterns. Issues that were addressed included methods of evaluation of airway obstruction, including polysomnography, choices for home care in children in whom observation and positioning treatment failed, and complications of the various treatment modalities. The lack of unanimity among the respondents mirrors the controversy found in the literature. Though tracheotomy appears to be favored as the method of long-term management, responses from those surveyed often were based on emotions as much as on scientific data. This report details those findings and offers suggestions to clinicians involved with the management of patients with Pierre Robin sequence with airway compromise. (Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1998;118:630-5.)

Section snippets

METHODS AND MATERIAL

In December 1994, a survey of pediatric otolaryngology fellowship training programs in the United States and Canada was conducted by telephone interviews and a data collection form to determine how the airway is managed in children with PRS. One form was sent to each institution and a consensus was obtained from the practitioners at each center. Twenty-three surveys were distributed with 100% response.

Nine questions were used to clarify the general guidelines used in the treatment of patients

RESULTS

All 23 fellowship training programs are involved in the airway management of children with PRS. As can be seen from the graph in Fig. 1, most services evaluate between 6 and 10 patients per year with this condition.

. Number of patients treated per year per program.

When asked whether sleep studies were indicated for most patients with PRS, only 9 (39%) of 23 believed this to be the case. Of those nine who obtained sleep studies routinely, one performed polysomnography on all children before

DISCUSSION

A survey was conducted to evaluate the current management techniques used by pediatric otolaryngologists in the treatment of patients with PRS with airway obstruction. These results are presented.

Before we discuss the relative advantages and disadvantages of the different means of airway management in PRS, it is important to understand the pathophysiologic background of airway obstruction in these children. Several potential physiologic factors in airway obstruction have been described,

References (14)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (67)

  • Cleft Lip and Palate

    2021, Cummings Pediatric Otolaryngology
  • Advanced airway management strategies for severe OSAS and craniofacial anomalies

    2017, American Journal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Medicine and Surgery
  • Sleep architecture in Pierre-Robin sequence: The effect of mandibular distraction osteogenesis

    2016, International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Conservative approaches to PRS patients with upper airway obstruction include prone positioning, a nasopharyngeal airway (NPA), and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). There is mixed literature regarding efficacy and tolerability of NPA and CPAP for long-term management of infant upper airway obstruction [9,10]. Those patients with severe obstructive symptoms are less likely to tolerate long-term conservative measures, and are appropriate surgical candidates [9].

  • Robin sequence: A European survey on current practice patterns

    2015, Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
    Citation Excerpt :

    Since the first, original description of RS by Pierre Robin in 1923, both the definition and management of RS have been topics of debate. Previous surveys on this condition carried out among American Pediatric Otolaryngology Fellowship programs, members of the American Cleft Palate–Craniofacial Association, and members of Dutch and Belgian cleft palate teams all found a widespread lack in uniformity (Myer Iii et al. 1998; Breugem and Mink van der Molen 2009; Breugem and Courtemanche 2010; Collins et al. 2013; Basart et al. 2015). This first European survey on both the definition and management confirms these previous findings by revealing a large variety in current practice patterns within European clinics.

View all citing articles on Scopus

From the Department of Otolaryngology and Maxillofacial Surgery (Drs. Myer, Cotton, Willging, and Shott), Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati; and the Ear, Nose and Throat Surgical Group (Dr. Reed), Jackson.

☆☆

Reprint requests: Charles M. Myer III, MD, Department of Otolaryngology, Children’s Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Ave., Cincinnati, OH 45229-3039.

0194-5998/98/$5.00 + 0  23/1/82446

View full text