Korean J Anesthesiol Search


Korean J Anesthesiol > Volume 72(6); 2019 > Article
Singh, Mohanty, and Rao: Ambiguous pediatric endotracheal tube intubation depth markings: a need for standardization
The use of uncuffed endotracheal tubes (ETTs) is preferred in children for securing the airway during general anesthesia or in the intensive care unit. We noticed a difference in the depth marks of uncuffed tubes such as single line, double line, broader black line at different lengths, and even no markings at all (Fig. 1). Tube markings vary from 1.8 to 6.5 cm, and there are no manufacturer recommendations for them. This issue needs to be reviewed to improve safety margins in pediatric intubations. Adherence to ETT insertion depth guidelines may be insufficient to prevent malposition [1]. ETTs have a black line (vocal cord marking) near the distal end that guides proper placement. This is a simple, safe, and reliable method for ensuring appropriate length and avoiding endo-bronchial intubation. Many trainees are uncertain about the use of common vocal cord markings on ETTs. Neonates and infants are at a higher risk of endo-bronchial intubation due to short tracheal length. A wide discrepancy in intubation depth marker placement can create confusion [2]. Even positioning ETTs by auscultation may lead to deeper placement than the mid-trachea [3]. We use tracheal palpation, PALS (Pediatric Advanced Life Support) predictive formula, and bilateral chest auscultation to ensure equal breath sounds [4]. Further confirmation can be done by using fiberoptic broncoscope or ultrasonography if required [5]. We suggest standardizing ETT markings as well as the enforcement of clear manufacturer recommendations for their usage to avoid endo-bronchial intubations.


Mr. Surya Kanta Acharya and Mr. Prakash Kumar Swain (OT Staff).


Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Authors’ contribution

Neha Singh (Conceptualization; Supervision; Writing–original draft; Writing–review & editing)

Chitta Ranjan Mohanty (Conceptualization; Writing–original draft)

Parnandi Bhaskar Rao (Conceptualization; Writing–original draft)

Fig. 1.
Pediatric endotracheal tubes (ETT) marking variations.


1. Volsko TA, McNinch NL, Prough DS, Bigham MT. Adherence to endotracheal tube depth guidelines and incidence of malposition in infants and children. Respir Care 2018; 63: 1111–7.
crossref pmid
2. Goel S, Lim SL. The intubation depth marker: the confusion of the black line. Paediatr Anaesth 2003; 13: 579–83.
crossref pmid
3. Yoo SY, Kim JH, Han SH, Oh AY. A comparative study of endotracheal tube positioning methods in children: safety from neck movement. Anesth Analg 2007; 105: 620–5.
crossref pmid
4. Gamble JJ, McKay WP, Wang AF, Yip KA, O'Brien JM, Plewes CE. Three-finger tracheal palpation to guide endotracheal tube depth in children. Paediatr Anaesth 2014; 24: 1050–5.
5. Sheth M, Jaeel P, Nguyen J. Ultrasonography for Verification of Endotracheal Tube Position in Neonates and Infants. Am J Perinatol 2017; 34: 627–32.
crossref pmid pdf


Browse all articles >

Editorial Office
101-3503, Lotte Castle President, 109 Mapo-daero, Mapo-gu, Seoul 04146, Korea
Tel: +82-2-795-5129    Fax: +82-2-792-4089    E-mail: anesthesia@kams.or.kr                

Copyright © 2020 by Korean Society of Anesthesiologists. All rights reserved.

Developed in M2community

Close layer
prev next