Natalini Giuseppe, Lanza Gabriella, Rosano Antonio, Dell'Agnolo Piera, Bernardini Achille
Department of Anesthesia, Intensive CareEmergency, Casa di Cura Poliambulanza, Via Bissolati 57, 25124 Brescia, Italy.
J Clin Anesth. 2003 Sep;15(6):428-32. doi: 10.1016/s0952-8180(03)00085-0.
To compare the frequency of airway seal and sore throat with the LMA-ProSeal (PLMA) and the standard Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) during laparoscopic surgery.
Prospective, controlled, randomized, nonblinded clinical study.
University-affiliated hospital.
60 adult, ASA physical status I, II, and III patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery with general anesthesia, without contraindication to the use of the laryngeal mask.
Patients were randomized to receive mechanical ventilation [tidal volume (V(T)) 7 mL/kg(-1); positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) 10 cmH(2)O] through the PLMA or the standard LMA, both equipped with a gastric tube.
Heart rate, arterial pressure, inspiratory and expiratory V(T), airway pressure, end-tidal CO(2) partial pressure, and pulse oximetry were recorded. The leak fraction was calculated as the difference between the inspiratory and expiratory V(T) divided by the inspiratory V(T). Postoperative sore throat frequency was scored in the recovery room ("early") and 1 week after surgery ("late").
All patients were successfully ventilated through the assigned laryngeal mask. The leak fraction was 7 +/- 3% with the LMA and 7 +/- 4% with the PLMA (p = 0.731). In one patient, the PLMA drainage tube was not patent despite a leak fraction of 5%, and there was no clinically detectable air leak. During the recovery room stay, the frequency of sore throat was scored as mild in 13% and 10% of patients with the standard LMA and the PLMA, respectively, and was absent in the remaining patients (p = 0.99, between groups). There were no differences in the frequency of sore throat between the "early" and "late" evaluations (p = 0.99).
The PLMA and the LMA show similar airtight efficiency during laparoscopy. The patency of the PLMA drainage tube should always be confirmed. The sore throat evaluation performed in recovery room appears as reliable as later evaluations.
比较在腹腔镜手术中,喉罩通气道-ProSeal(PLMA)和标准喉罩通气道(LMA)的气道密封效果及咽痛发生频率。
前瞻性、对照、随机、非盲法临床研究。
大学附属医院。
60例成年患者,ASA身体状况分级为I、II和III级,接受全身麻醉下的腹腔镜手术,无喉罩使用禁忌证。
患者随机分为两组,分别通过配有胃管的PLMA或标准LMA接受机械通气[潮气量(V(T))7 mL/kg(-1);呼气末正压(PEEP)10 cmH(2)O]。
记录心率、动脉压、吸气和呼气V(T)、气道压力、呼气末二氧化碳分压及脉搏血氧饱和度。漏气分数计算为吸气和呼气V(T)之差除以吸气V(T)。在恢复室(“早期”)及术后1周(“晚期”)对咽痛发生频率进行评分。
所有患者均通过指定的喉罩成功通气。LMA的漏气分数为7±3%,PLMA为7±4%(p = 0.731)。1例患者的PLMA引流管虽漏气分数为5%但不通畅,且无临床可检测到的漏气。在恢复室停留期间,标准LMA组和PLMA组分别有13%和10%的患者咽痛评分为轻度,其余患者无咽痛(组间p = 0.99)。“早期”和“晚期”评估的咽痛发生频率无差异(p = 0.99)。
在腹腔镜手术中,PLMA和LMA的气密效果相似。应始终确认PLMA引流管的通畅性。在恢复室进行的咽痛评估似乎与后期评估一样可靠。