Nam S B, Han D W, Chang C H, Lee J S
Department of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Anaesthesia and Pain Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 146-92 Dogok-dong, Kangnam-gu, Seoul, Korea.
Anaesthesia. 2007 Dec;62(12):1285-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2007.05250.x.
We performed a randomised, crossover study in 38 anaesthetised and paralysed patients to compare the performance of the CobraPLA and the LMA Classic during controlled ventilation. The median (IQR [range]) airway leak pressure was 23.0 (20-24 [12-30]) cmH(2)O for the CobraPLA and 15.0 (12-19 [8-30]) cmH(2)O for the LMA Classic (p < 0.001). The median (IQR [range]) insertion time was 15.0 (11-26 [9-31]) s for the CobraPLA and 22.5 (20-25 [15-50]) s for the LMA Classic (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two devices for the number of insertion and reposition attempts, the anatomical position scored by fibreoptic bronchoscopy or the peak and plateau airway pressures. There were no adverse events during anaesthesia. The CobraPLA provides a better airway leak pressure and takes less time to insert than the LMA Classic in paralysed patients. Our data show that the CobraPLA can be used to secure a patent airway during controlled ventilation in selected patients.
我们对38例麻醉和瘫痪患者进行了一项随机交叉研究，以比较CobraPLA和LMA Classic在控制通气期间的性能。CobraPLA的气道漏气压力中位数（IQR[范围]）为23.0（20 - 24[12 - 30]）cmH₂O，LMA Classic为15.0（12 - 19[8 - 30]）cmH₂O（p < 0.001）。CobraPLA的插入时间中位数（IQR[范围]）为15.0（11 - 26[9 - 31]）秒，LMA Classic为22.5（20 - 25[15 - 50]）秒（p < 0.001）。两种装置在插入和重新定位尝试次数、纤维支气管镜检查评分的解剖位置或气道峰压和平台压方面无显著差异。麻醉期间无不良事件发生。在瘫痪患者中，CobraPLA比LMA Classic提供更好的气道漏气压力，插入时间更短。我们的数据表明，CobraPLA可用于在选定患者的控制通气期间确保气道通畅。
Zotero 插件