Suppr超能文献

经支气管镜超声引导下的弯曲探头气道内麻醉(CP-EBUS)两种技术的气道麻醉的先导随机研究。

Pilot randomized study comparing two techniques of airway anaesthesia during curvilinear probe endobronchial ultrasound bronchoscopy (CP-EBUS).

机构信息

Section of Interventional Pulmonology and Thoracic Oncology, Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Division, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-4283, USA.

出版信息

Respirology. 2011 Jan;16(1):102-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1843.2010.01861.x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates two different techniques for topically anaesthetizing the airway with lidocaine during curvilinear probe endobronchial ultrasound bronchoscopy (CP-EBUS): standard injection through the working channel and spray catheter application.

METHODS

This was a randomized, non-blinded, single-centre pilot study. Patients with plans for CP-EBUS under moderate sedation were enrolled. All patients received nebulized lidocaine followed by posterior oropharyngeal lidocaine via atomizer and a cotton ball swab using McGill forceps. Patients were then randomly assigned to lidocaine administration using spray catheter instillation or direct application through the working channel. Lidocaine was administered in a uniform fashion by a single investigator throughout the study. The primary end-point was the number of significant coughing episodes in the first 30 min of bronchoscopy. Other end-points included lidocaine and intravenous sedation medication dosage; severe coughing session; and number of transbronchial needle aspirations.

RESULTS

Forty patients were included in the study: 20 patients in each group. The median numbers of coughing episodes in the first 30 min were 1 (spray catheter group) and 2 (standard injection group) (P < 0.004). Six patients in the standard installation group experienced severe coughing sessions, while there was none in the spray catheter group (P = 0.02). There were no statistical differences between the groups in the dosage of lidocaine or intravenous sedation medications used. There were a greater number of transbronchial needle aspirations performed in the spray catheter group (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Lidocaine delivery via the spray catheter reduced the number of significant coughing episodes compared with standard working channel injection during CP-EBUS. Larger studies are needed to confirm these exploratory findings.

摘要

背景与目的

本研究评估了两种在经支气管镜超声引导针吸活检术(CP-EBUS)中用利多卡因局部麻醉气道的不同技术:标准通过工作通道注射和喷雾导管应用。

方法

这是一项随机、非盲、单中心的试点研究。计划在中度镇静下进行 CP-EBUS 的患者被纳入研究。所有患者均接受雾化利多卡因,然后通过雾化器和使用 McGill 钳的棉花球拭子进行后口咽利多卡因。随后,患者被随机分配至通过喷雾导管滴注或直接通过工作通道应用利多卡因。在整个研究过程中,由一名研究人员统一给予利多卡因。主要终点是支气管镜检查前 30 分钟内出现明显咳嗽发作的次数。其他终点包括利多卡因和静脉镇静药物剂量、剧烈咳嗽发作和经支气管针吸次数。

结果

40 例患者纳入研究,每组 20 例。前 30 分钟内咳嗽发作的中位数次数分别为 1 次(喷雾导管组)和 2 次(标准注射组)(P < 0.004)。标准安装组中有 6 例患者发生严重咳嗽发作,而喷雾导管组中则无(P = 0.02)。两组之间使用的利多卡因或静脉镇静药物剂量无统计学差异。在喷雾导管组中进行的经支气管针吸次数更多(P = 0.008)。

结论

与 CP-EBUS 期间标准工作通道注射相比,通过喷雾导管输送利多卡因可减少明显咳嗽发作的次数。需要更大的研究来证实这些探索性发现。

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