在择期手术中使用 Laryngeal tube S II、一次性 Laryngeal tube S、Fastrach 喉罩和一次性 Fastrach 喉罩：可重复使用和一次性声门上气道装置的随机对照比较。

Laryngeal tube S II, laryngeal tube S disposable, Fastrach laryngeal mask and Fastrach laryngeal mask disposable during elective surgery: a randomized controlled comparison between reusable and disposable supraglottic airway devices.

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2010 May;27(5):468-72. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e3283372512.

DOI:10.1097/EJA.0b013e3283372512

PMID:20216069

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Analogue disposable devices of the laryngeal tube S II (LTS II) and the Fastrach laryngeal intubation mask (ILMA, Fastrach), namely the laryngeal tube disposable (LTS-D) and the Fastrach laryngeal intubation mask disposable (Fastrach-D), have recently been introduced. The purpose of this study was to compare each reusable device with the corresponding disposable one, during routine surgery.

METHODS

After informed consent, 120 American Society of Anesthesiologists I-III patients scheduled for routine minor surgery were randomly allocated to the LTS II (n = 30), the LTS-D (n = 30), the Fastrach (n = 30) and the Fastrach-D (n = 30) groups, respectively. Overall insertion success rates, time to first sufficient ventilation (V(e)t > or = 200 ml), resulting airway leak pressures (ALPs), subjective assessment of handling as well as patient comfort were determined.

RESULTS

Insertion success rates of the LTS II, LTS-D, Fastrach and Fastrach-D were 30/30, 29/30, 30/30 and 30/30, respectively. Time to successful insertion in the LTS II vs. the LTS-D group, as well as in the Fastrach vs. the Fastrach-D group, showed significant differences [median (min-max) s: 38 (13-187), 23 (9-108), P < 0,05; 27.5 (6-110), 16 (8-82), P < 0.05]. The highest ALP could be observed in the LTS-D group [median (min-max): 40 (16-40), P < 0.001 vs. all other devices] and the lowest ALP in the Fastrach-D group [median (min-max): 24.5 (12-40)]. ALP did not differ significantly in any group during variation of cuff volume by +/-20 ml. Subjective assessment of handling was significantly (P < 0.001) better in the LTS-D group than in the LTS II, Fastrach and Fastrach-D groups.

CONCLUSION

LTS II, LTS-D, Fastrach and Fastrach-D were all suitable for routine airway management. The LTS-D showed the best properties in terms of airway sealing and handling.

摘要

背景与目的

最近推出了喉管 S II（LTS II）和 Fastrach 喉插管面罩（ILMA，Fastrach）的一次性模拟装置，即喉管一次性（LTS-D）和 Fastrach 喉插管面罩一次性（Fastrach-D）。本研究旨在比较每种可重复使用的设备与相应的一次性设备，在常规手术期间。

方法

在获得知情同意后，120 名美国麻醉医师协会 I-III 级择期行常规小手术的患者被随机分为 LTS II（n=30）、LTS-D（n=30）、Fastrach（n=30）和 Fastrach-D（n=30）组。总体插入成功率、首次充分通气（V（e）t≥200ml）的时间、气道泄漏压力（ALP）、处理的主观评估以及患者舒适度。

结果

LTS II、LTS-D、Fastrach 和 Fastrach-D 的插入成功率分别为 30/30、29/30、30/30 和 30/30。LTS II 与 LTS-D 组、Fastrach 与 Fastrach-D 组的插入时间存在显著差异[中位数（最小-最大）s：38（13-187）、23（9-108），P<0.05；27.5（6-110）、16（8-82），P<0.05]。LTS-D 组的最高 ALP 可观察到[中位数（最小-最大）：40（16-40），P<0.001 与所有其他装置]，Fastrach-D 组的最低 ALP[中位数（最小-最大）：24.5（12-40）]。在每个组中，当袖带体积变化±20ml 时，ALP 没有显著差异。处理的主观评估在 LTS-D 组明显（P<0.001）优于 LTS II、Fastrach 和 Fastrach-D 组。