Greenland K B, Lam M C, Irwin M G
Department of Anaesthesiology, Caritas Medical Centre, 111 Wing Hong Street, Shamshuipo, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
Anaesthesia. 2004 Feb;59(2):173-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2004.03527.x.
A randomised study was carried out in 60 anaesthetised patients with no evidence of airway difficulties, to compare the Williams Airway Intubator and the Ovassapian Fibreoptic Intubating Airway for bronchoscopic view and ease of railroading a tracheal tube during fibreoptic orotracheal intubation. The Williams Airway Intubator provided a better view of the glottis (41 (68.3%) unobstructed views) than the Ovassapian Fibreoptic Intubating Airway (15 (25%) unobstructed views; p < 0.0001) and a shorter time was needed to complete bronchoscopy (median (95% CI) difference 4 s (1-7); p = 0.01). Four (6.7%) bronchoscopies failed using the Williams Airway Intubator compared with 26 (43.3%) using the Ovassapian Fibreoptic Intubating Airway (p < 0.0001). Both airways provided similar intubating conditions when the glottis was visible.
对60例无气道困难证据的麻醉患者进行了一项随机研究，以比较Williams气道插管器和Ovassapian纤维光导气管插管气道在纤维光导经口气管插管期间的支气管镜视野及气管导管引导的难易程度。与Ovassapian纤维光导气管插管气道相比，Williams气道插管器能提供更好的声门视野（41例（68.3%）视野无遮挡）（15例（25%）视野无遮挡；p<0.0001），且完成支气管镜检查所需时间更短（中位数（95%CI）差异为4秒（1 - 7）；p = 0.01）。使用Williams气道插管器进行支气管镜检查失败4例（6.7%），而使用Ovassapian纤维光导气管插管气道失败26例（43.3%）（p<0.0001）。当声门可见时，两种气道提供的插管条件相似。
