Komatsu Ryu, Nagata Osamu, Sessler Daniel I, Ozaki Makoto
Department of Anesthesiology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
Anesth Analg. 2004 Mar;98(3):858-61, table of contents. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000100741.46539.6b.
Although the difficulty of tracheal intubation in the lateral position has not been systematically evaluated, airway loss during surgery in a laterally positioned patient may have hazardous consequences. We explored whether the intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA) facilitates tracheal intubation in patients with normal airway anatomy, i.e., Mallampati grade <or=3 and thyromental distance >or=5 cm, positioned in the lateral position. We evaluated whether this technique can be used as a rescue when the airway is lost during the middle of surgery in laterally positioned patients with respect to success rate and intubation time. Anesthesia was induced with propofol, fentanyl, and vecuronium in 50 patients undergoing spine surgery for lumbar disk herniation (Lateral) and 50 undergoing other surgical procedures (Supine). Patients having disk surgery (Lateral) were positioned on their right or left sides before induction of general anesthesia, and intubation was performed in that position. Patients in the control group (Supine) were anesthetized in supine position, and intubation was performed in that position. Intubation was performed blindly via an ILMA in both groups. The time required for intubation and number and types of adjusting maneuvers used were recorded. Data were compared by the Mann-Whitney U test, Fisher's exact test, chi(2) test, or unpaired Student's t-test, as appropriate. Data presented as mean (SD). Demographic and airway measures were similar in the two groups, except for mouth opening, which was slightly wider in patients in the lateral position: 5.1 (0.9) versus 4.6 (0.7) cm. The time required for intubation was similar in each group ( approximately 25 s), as was intubation success (96%). We conclude that blind intubation via an ILMA offers a frequent success rate and a clinically acceptable intubation time (<1 min) even in the lateral position.
Blind intubation via the intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA) offers frequent success and a clinically acceptable intubation time even in patients in the lateral position.
尽管侧卧位气管插管的难度尚未得到系统评估,但侧卧位患者手术期间气道丧失可能会产生危险后果。我们探讨了插管喉罩气道(ILMA)是否有助于气道解剖结构正常(即Mallampati分级≤3级且甲颏距离≥5 cm)的侧卧位患者进行气管插管。我们评估了在侧卧位患者手术过程中气道丧失时,该技术相对于成功率和插管时间能否用作补救措施。对50例行腰椎间盘突出症脊柱手术的患者(侧卧位)和50例行其他外科手术的患者(仰卧位)使用丙泊酚、芬太尼和维库溴铵诱导麻醉。行椎间盘手术的患者(侧卧位)在全身麻醉诱导前置于右侧或左侧卧位,并在该体位下进行插管。对照组患者(仰卧位)在仰卧位下麻醉,并在该体位下进行插管。两组均通过ILMA盲目进行插管。记录插管所需时间以及所使用的调整操作的次数和类型。数据根据情况采用Mann-Whitney U检验、Fisher精确检验、χ²检验或非配对学生t检验进行比较。数据以均值(标准差)表示。除开口度外,两组的人口统计学和气道测量指标相似,侧卧位患者的开口度略宽:5.1(0.9)cm对4.6(0.7)cm。每组插管所需时间相似(约25秒),插管成功率也相似(96%)。我们得出结论,即使在侧卧位,通过ILMA盲目插管也具有较高的成功率和临床上可接受的插管时间(<1分钟)。
即使对于侧卧位患者,通过插管喉罩气道(ILMA)盲目插管也具有较高的成功率和临床上可接受的插管时间。