Helmy Amr M, Atef Hossam M, El-Taher Ezzat M, Henidak Ahmed Mosaad
Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt.
Saudi J Anaesth. 2010 Sep;4(3):131-6. doi: 10.4103/1658-354X.71250.
To compare two different supraglottic airway devices, the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) and the I-gel, regarding easiness of insertion of the device, leak pressure, gastric insufflation, end tidal CO(2), oxygen saturation, hemodynamic and postoperative complications in anesthetized, spontaneously ventilated adult patients performing different non-emergency surgical procedures.
The study was carried out as a prospective, randomized, clinical trial among 80 patients who underwent different surgical procedures under general anesthesia with spontaneous ventilation in supine position. They were equally randomized into two groups: I-gel and LMA groups. Both the devices were compared with regard to heart rate, arterial BP, SPO(2), end-tidal CO(2), number and duration of insertion attempts, incidence of gastric insufflation, leak pressure and airway assessment after removal of the device.
No statistically significant difference was reported between both the groups, regarding heart rate, arterial BP, SPO(2) and end-tidal CO(2). The mean duration of insertion attempts was 15.6±4.9 seconds in the I-gel group, while it was 26.2±17.7 seconds in the LMA group. The difference between both the groups regarding duration of insertion attempts was statistically significant (P=0.0023*), while the number of insertion attempts was statistically insignificant between both the study groups (P>0.05). Leak pressure was (25.6±4.9 vs. 21.2±7.7 cm H(2)O) significantly higher among studied patients of the I-gel group (P=0.016*) and the incidence of gastric insufflation was significantly more with LMA group 9 (22.5%) vs. I-gel group (5%) (P=0.016).
Both LMA and I-gel do not cause any significant alteration in the hemodynamic status of the patients, end tidal CO(2), and SPO(2). The postoperative complications were not significantly different except nusea and vomiting was statistically significant higher in LMA group (P=0.032). among both LMA and I-gel patients. Insertion of I-gel was significantly easier and more rapid than insertion of LMA. Leak pressure was significantly higher with I-gel than LMA and thus incidence of gastric insufflation was significantly lower with I-gel.
比较两种不同的声门上气道装置,即喉罩气道(LMA)和I-gel,在接受不同非急诊外科手术的麻醉、自主通气成年患者中,关于装置插入的难易程度、漏气压力、胃内充气、呼气末二氧化碳分压、血氧饱和度、血流动力学及术后并发症。
本研究为前瞻性、随机临床试验,纳入80例在全身麻醉下仰卧位自主通气接受不同外科手术的患者。他们被随机分为两组:I-gel组和LMA组。比较两组在心率、动脉血压、血氧饱和度、呼气末二氧化碳分压、插入尝试次数及持续时间、胃内充气发生率、漏气压力以及装置移除后的气道评估情况。
两组在心率、动脉血压、血氧饱和度和呼气末二氧化碳分压方面无统计学显著差异。I-gel组插入尝试的平均持续时间为15.6±4.9秒,而LMA组为26.2±17.7秒。两组在插入尝试持续时间上的差异具有统计学显著性(P = 0.0023*),而在插入尝试次数上两组间无统计学显著性(P>0.05)。I-gel组研究患者的漏气压力(25.6±4.9 vs. 21.2±7.7 cm H₂O)显著更高(P = 0.016*),LMA组胃内充气发生率显著高于I-gel组(9例[22.5%] vs. I-gel组[5%])(P = 0.016)。
LMA和I-gel均未引起患者血流动力学状态、呼气末二氧化碳分压和血氧饱和度的任何显著改变。除LMA组恶心和呕吐发生率在统计学上显著更高(P = 0.032)外,两组术后并发症无显著差异。I-gel的插入比LMA显著更容易、更快速。I-gel的漏气压力显著高于LMA,因此I-gel的胃内充气发生率显著更低。