Suppr超能文献

改良气道管理装置与喉罩气道在妇科手术患者中的比较。

Comparison of the modified Airway Management Device with the Proseal laryngeal mask airway in patients undergoing gynaecological procedures.

作者信息

Pay L L, Lim Y

机构信息

KK Women's and Children's Hospital, Department of Women's Anaesthesia, Singapore.

出版信息

Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2006 Jan;23(1):71-5. doi: 10.1017/S0265021505001808.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The modified Airway Management Device (AMD) and the Proseal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) are both supraglottic airway devices designed to maintain airway patency and allow ventilation during anaesthesia. In this prospective, randomized trial, we compared the two devices in patients undergoing major gynaecological procedures.

METHODS

Eighty-two patients undergoing elective gynaecological surgery were randomized to two groups. Group A (n = 41) had the AMD and Group P (n = 41) the PLMA inserted after induction of anaesthesia. We compared the success of airway placement, time to achieve an airway, oropharyngeal leak pressure and complications associated during anaesthesia.

RESULTS

There were no differences in patient characteristic profile for both groups. First time insertion success rates were significantly higher in Group P than in Group A (100% vs. 83%, P < 0.012). Time taken to achieve airway was also significantly shorter in Group P than in Group A (mean 21.9 +/- 7.8 s vs. 40.2 +/- 48.0 s, P < 0.001). The oropharyngeal leak pressure was significantly higher for Group P than Group A (mean 31.2 +/- 5.7 cmH(2)O vs. 24.2 +/- 8.3 cmH(2)O, P < 0.001). Ten patients in Group A had transient loss of airway during anaesthesia and needed manipulation of the airway device and four patients needed to have the airway switched to PLMA for the rest of the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified AMD has a significant lower first time successful placement rate, required a longer insertion time and has a lower oropharyngeal leak pressure than the PLMA. It also demonstrated an increased loss of airway during anaesthesia. The modified AMD needs further evaluation on its efficacy and safety before its further use can be recommended.

摘要

背景与目的

改良气道管理装置(AMD)和喉罩气道(PLMA)均为声门上气道装置,旨在维持气道通畅并在麻醉期间实现通气。在这项前瞻性随机试验中,我们比较了这两种装置在接受大型妇科手术患者中的应用情况。

方法

82例接受择期妇科手术的患者被随机分为两组。A组(n = 41)在麻醉诱导后插入AMD,P组(n = 41)在麻醉诱导后插入PLMA。我们比较了气道放置成功率、建立气道的时间、口咽漏气压以及麻醉期间相关并发症。

结果

两组患者的特征概况无差异。P组首次插入成功率显著高于A组(100% 对 8%,P < 0.012)。P组建立气道所需时间也显著短于A组(平均21.9 +/- 7.8秒对40.2 +/- 48.0秒,P < 0.001)。P组的口咽漏气压显著高于A组(平均31.2 +/- 5.7 cmH₂O对24.2 +/- 8.3 cmH₂O,P < 0.001)。A组有10例患者在麻醉期间出现短暂气道丧失,需要对气道装置进行操作,4例患者在手术剩余过程中需要将气道转换为PLMA。

结论

改良AMD的首次成功放置率显著低于PLMA,插入时间更长,口咽漏气压更低。它还显示出麻醉期间气道丧失增加。在推荐进一步使用之前,改良AMD的有效性和安全性需要进一步评估。

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