Suppr超能文献

[复苏模型中不同喉罩气道的比较]

[Comparison of different laryngeal mask airways in a resuscitation model].

作者信息

Genzwürker H, Hundt A, Finteis T, Ellinger K

机构信息

Institut für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Mannheim.

出版信息

Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 2003 Feb;38(2):94-101. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-36992.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The standard laryngeal mask airway LMA-Classic is recommended in the ILCOR guidelines as alternative to facemask and tracheal tube during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. LMA-Unique, LMA-Fastrach and LMA-ProSeal are additional variants that are compared with the standard LMA in a resuscitation model.

METHODS

Tidal volumes, chest compressions and signs of gastric inflation are measured in a standardized resuscitation model (Ambu Cardiac Care Trainer with notebook and thumper). Ten 3-minute resuscitation cycles were performed with facemask and all LMAs (Classic, Unique, Fastrach, ProSeal, all size 4) with a ventilation : compression ratio of 2:15. To allow comparison with tracheal tube and to judge safety margins, another ten resuscitation cycles were performed with tracheal tube and all laryngeal masks with continuous chest compressions after two initial ventilations. The bag-valve device used for ventilation was replaced by an automatic transport ventilator in a third series with continuous chest compressions. Cuff pressures were set at 80 cm H2O.

RESULTS

During interrupted chest compressions, adequate ventilation was possible with all devices. Tidal volumes for facemask, LMA-Fastrach and LMA-ProSeal were significantly (p < 0.001) higher than with LMA- Classic and LMA-Unique. During continuous chest compressions, significant differences (p < 0.001) occurred when comparing tracheal tube, Fastrach and ProSeal with the other two laryngeal mask airways, which did not reach recommended tidal volumes. During ventilation with the automatic transport ventilator, values for all devices except LMA-ProSeal dropped significantly, adequate ventilation was possible with tracheal tube, Fastrach and ProSeal. Signs of gastric inflation were found during ventilation with facemask and - to a lesser extent - with LMA-Classic.

CONCLUSION

In the resuscitation model chosen, all laryngeal mask airways are possible alternatives for ventilation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The new LMA-ProSeal and also the LMA-Fastrach allow higher tidal volumes even during elevated intrathoracic pressures caused by continuous chest compressions, performing superior to the standard laryngeal mask airway. For inclusion of these devices in the ILCOR guidelines, further research in patients is warranted.

摘要

目的

国际复苏联络委员会(ILCOR)指南推荐标准喉罩气道LMA-Classic在心肺复苏期间可作为面罩和气管导管的替代方案。LMA-Unique、LMA-Fastrach和LMA-ProSeal是另外几种变体,在复苏模型中与标准LMA进行了比较。

方法

在标准化复苏模型(配备笔记本电脑和胸外按压装置的Ambu心脏护理训练器)中测量潮气量、胸外按压及胃胀气迹象。使用面罩和所有LMA(Classic、Unique、Fastrach、ProSeal,均为4号尺寸)进行了10个3分钟的复苏周期,通气与按压比例为2:15。为了与气管导管进行比较并判断安全边际,在最初两次通气后,使用气管导管和所有喉罩进行持续胸外按压又进行了10个复苏周期。在第三组持续胸外按压过程中,用于通气的球囊面罩装置被自动转运呼吸机取代。袖带压力设定为80 cm H2O。

结果

在胸外按压中断期间,所有装置均可实现充分通气。面罩、LMA-Fastrach和LMA-ProSeal的潮气量显著高于(p < 0.001)LMA-Classic和LMA-Unique。在持续胸外按压期间,将气管导管、Fastrach和ProSeal与其他两种喉罩气道进行比较时出现显著差异(p < 0.001),后二者未达到推荐的潮气量。在使用自动转运呼吸机通气时,除LMA-ProSeal外,所有装置的值均显著下降,气管导管、Fastrach和ProSeal可实现充分通气。在使用面罩通气期间以及在较小程度上使用LMA-Classic通气期间发现了胃胀气迹象。

结论

在所选用的复苏模型中,所有喉罩气道均可作为心肺复苏期间通气的替代方案。新型LMA-ProSeal以及LMA-Fastrach即使在持续胸外按压导致胸内压升高的情况下也能实现更高的潮气量,其表现优于标准喉罩气道。为将这些装置纳入ILCOR指南,有必要在患者中进行进一步研究。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验