Andrews D T, Williams D L, Alexander K D, Lie Y
Department ofAnaesthesia and Pain Management, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Anaesth Intensive Care. 2009 Jan;37(1):85-92. doi: 10.1177/0310057X0903700107.
We tested the hypothesis that the Cobra Perilaryngeal Airway (PLA) with its high volume low-pressure cuff would provide superior airway leakage pressure compared with the Classic Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) in spontaneously breathing adult patients. Ninety consecutive adult patients were randomly allocated to receive one of these two supralaryngeal devices. The airway leakage pressure was higher for the PLA compared with the LMA (22 +/- 9 cmH2O vs. 18 +/- 6 cmH2O; P < 0.05). The mean airway device intracuff pressure was lower for the PLA compared to the LMA (36.1 +/- 15.2 mmHg vs. 86.3 +/- 25.3 mmHg P < 0.0001). The time required to achieve successful insertion was greater for the PLA compared with the LMA (39 +/- 21 seconds vs. 27 +/- 10 seconds; P < 0.005). The number of attempts required to achieve successful insertion and the incidence of postoperative complications were similar in both groups. The findings suggest that the PLA provides a superior airway seal at a lower intracuff pressure compared to the LMA. However the time for successful insertion may be increased.
对于自主呼吸的成年患者，带有大容量低压套囊的眼镜蛇喉罩气道（PLA）与经典喉罩气道（LMA）相比，能提供更高的气道漏气压力。连续90例成年患者被随机分配接受这两种喉上气道装置之一。与LMA相比，PLA的气道漏气压力更高（22±9 cmH₂O对18±6 cmH₂O；P<0.05）。与LMA相比，PLA的平均气道装置套囊内压力更低（36.1±15.2 mmHg对86.3±25.3 mmHg，P<0.0001）。与LMA相比，PLA成功插入所需时间更长（39±21秒对27±10秒；P<0.005）。两组成功插入所需的尝试次数和术后并发症发生率相似。研究结果表明，与LMA相比，PLA在较低的套囊内压力下能提供更好的气道密封。然而，成功插入的时间可能会增加。
