Prospective diagnostic accuracy study evaluates ultrasonographic markers for difficult airway in adults, suggesting potential clinical use.
Background/Objectives: In patients without clinically anticipated difficulty, an unexpected difficult airway carries the greatest potential for harm, yet routine bedside tests exclude difficulty poorly, and evidence for point-of-care ultrasonography remains heterogeneous, with difficult mask ventilation rarely studied as a distinct outcome. We evaluated three rapid anterior-neck ultrasonographic parameters—tongue thickness (TT), skin-to-hyoid-bone distance (SHBD), and cricothyroid membrane length (CTML)—for their diagnostic performance and independent association with a difficult airway in adults without anticipated difficulty. Methods: In this prospective, single-center, diagnostic-accuracy study reported per STARD 2015 and STROBE, 713 adults (ASA I–III) underwent neutral-position measurement of TT, SHBD, and CTML by a sonographer blinded to the clinical assessment and airway-management outcomes. A composite difficult airway (difficult mask ventilation, laryngoscopy, or intubation) was assessed independently. Discrimination was evaluated by ROC analysis with DeLong comparisons, multivariable logistic regression, and bootstrap internal validation; p-values used Benjamini–Hochberg correction. Results: A difficult airway occurred in 197/713 patients (27.6%). TT and SHBD were associated with the composite outcome and all components (AUC 0.68–0.73) and remained independent after adjustment for age, sex, BMI, and Mallampati class; CTML discriminated poorly (AUC ≈ 0.55), with only marginal significance after correction. Negative predictive values were high (78–99%) but prevalence-dependent, with modest likelihood ratios. Adding TT and SHBD to clinical variables improved discrimination (AUC 0.69 → 0.78; DeLong p < 0.001). Conclusions: TT and SHBD show a limited but independent diagnostic signal that may complement, not replace, clinical screening; CTML showed no clinically meaningful discrimination in this cohort. Proposed cut-offs are exploratory and require standardized measurement, reproducibility testing, and external validation before clinical adoption.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mutlu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: