Department of General Anesthesiology and Outcomes Researcht, Huron Hospital, Cleveland Clinic Health System, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Anaesthesia. 2011 Jul;66(7):550-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06659.x. Epub 2011 May 13.
We hypothesised that in obese patients, tracheal intubation with the GlideScope® would be advantageous compared with flexible fibreoptic intubation. Seventy-five anaesthetised obese patients were randomly assigned to oral intubation by either GlideScope or flexible fibreoptic bronchoscope. We compared the two devices for time to intubate (p = 0.19), difficulty of intubation (p = 0.58), successful intubation on first attempt (p = 0.29), number of attempts (p = 0.24), incidence of hypoxaemia (p = 0.57), amount of post-intubation bleeding (p = 0.79) and sore throat (p = 0.82). None differed significantly. Median (IQR [range]) time to intubation was 37 (25-48 [19-81]) s and 95% of the first attempts were successful with the GlideScope, vs 43 (35-58 [26-96]) s and an 86% first-attempt success rate with the flexible fibreoptic bronchoscope. For experienced users, the time required to intubate the trachea in anaesthetised obese patients is similar with the GlideScope and a flexible bronchoscope.
我们假设在肥胖患者中，与使用纤维支气管镜相比，使用 GlideScope®进行气管插管具有优势。75 名麻醉肥胖患者被随机分为使用 GlideScope 或纤维支气管镜进行经口插管。我们比较了两种设备的插管时间（p = 0.19）、插管难度（p = 0.58）、首次尝试插管成功率（p = 0.29）、尝试次数（p = 0.24）、低氧血症发生率（p = 0.57）、插管后出血（p = 0.79）和咽痛（p = 0.82）。均无显著差异。插管时间中位数（IQR [范围]）为 37（25-48 [19-81]）s，GlideScope 首次尝试成功率为 95%，而纤维支气管镜的插管时间中位数（IQR [范围]）为 43（35-58 [26-96]）s，首次尝试成功率为 86%。对于有经验的使用者来说，在麻醉肥胖患者中插入气管的时间，GlideScope 和纤维支气管镜相似。
