• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利：CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法，用中文像聊天一样搜索，搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐，让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版，准确专业，支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式，支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述，25分钟生成高质量综述，智能提取关键信息，辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Comparison of the ease of laryngeal mask airway ProSeal insertion and the fiberoptic scoring according to the head position and the presence of a difficult airway.比较根据头位和困难气道的存在情况，喉罩 ProSeal 插入的简易程度和纤维光学评分。
Korean J Anesthesiol. 2011 Apr;60(4):244-9. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2011.60.4.244. Epub 2011 Apr 26.
2
The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: A randomized, crossover study with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed, anesthetized patients.ProSeal喉罩气道：在麻痹、麻醉患者中与标准喉罩气道进行的一项随机交叉研究。
Anesthesiology. 2000 Jul;93(1):104-9. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200007000-00019.
3
Head elevation by 3 vs. 6 cm in ProSeal laryngeal mask airway insertion: a randomized controlled trial.在使用ProSeal喉罩气道插入时头部抬高3厘米与6厘米的比较：一项随机对照试验。
BMC Anesthesiol. 2016 Aug 5;16(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s12871-016-0220-3.
4
A multicenter study comparing the ProSeal and Classic laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized, nonparalyzed patients.一项在麻醉状态下未瘫痪患者中比较ProSeal喉罩气道和经典喉罩气道的多中心研究。
Anesthesiology. 2002 Feb;96(2):289-95. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200202000-00011.
5
Assessment of Success and Ease of Insertion of ProSeal™ Laryngeal Mask Airway versus I-gel™ Insertion by Paramedics in Simulated Difficult Airway Using Cervical Collar in Different Positions in Manikins.护理人员在使用不同体位的人体模型且佩戴颈托模拟困难气道情况下，对ProSeal™喉罩气道与I-gel™喉罩插入的成功率及插入难易程度的评估
Anesth Essays Res. 2020 Oct-Dec;14(4):627-631. doi: 10.4103/aer.AER_72_20. Epub 2021 May 6.
6
Stability of the LMA-ProSeal and standard laryngeal mask airway in different head and neck positions: a randomized crossover study.不同头颈部位置下LMA-ProSeal喉罩和标准喉罩气道的稳定性：一项随机交叉研究
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2003 Jan;20(1):65-9. doi: 10.1017/s0265021503000127.
7
Comparisons of clinical performance of Guardian laryngeal mask with laryngeal mask airway ProSeal.卫氏喉罩与ProSeal喉罩气道的临床性能比较。
BMC Anesthesiol. 2015 May 1;15:69. doi: 10.1186/s12871-015-0039-3.
8
Comparison of videolaryngoscope-guided versus standard digital insertion techniques of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway: a prospective randomized study.可视喉镜引导与标准数字插入技术在 ProSeal™ 喉罩气道中的比较：一项前瞻性随机研究。
BMC Anesthesiol. 2019 Dec 30;19(1):244. doi: 10.1186/s12871-019-0915-3.
9
The laryngeal mask airway Supreme--a single use laryngeal mask airway with an oesophageal vent. A randomised, cross-over study with the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal in paralysed, anaesthetised patients.喉罩气道Supreme——一种带有食管排气孔的一次性喉罩气道。在麻痹、麻醉患者中与ProSeal喉罩气道进行的随机交叉研究。
Anaesthesia. 2009 Jan;64(1):79-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05682.x.
10
Comparison of the Supreme and the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized controlled trial.腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者中 Supreme 喉罩与 ProSeal 喉罩气道的比较：一项随机对照试验。
Acta Anaesthesiol Taiwan. 2016 Jun;54(2):44-50. doi: 10.1016/j.aat.2016.03.001. Epub 2016 Apr 19.

引用本文的文献

1
How does head position affect laryngeal vision with a video laryngeal mask airway?头部位置如何影响使用视频喉罩气道时的喉部视野？
Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Dec 16;11:1469225. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1469225. eCollection 2024.
2
Ramped versus sniffing position for Ambu® AuraGainTM insertion in patients with obesity: a randomized controlled study.肥胖患者使用安比尤®奥瑞加因TM进行插管时斜坡卧位与嗅物位的比较：一项随机对照研究
Korean J Anesthesiol. 2024 Oct;77(5):518-525. doi: 10.4097/kja.24255. Epub 2024 Aug 19.
3
Evaluating the Optimal Operating Table Height for ProSeal-LMA™ Insertion.评估 ProSeal-LMA™ 插入的最佳手术台高度。
Int J Clin Pract. 2022 Nov 17;2022:5118362. doi: 10.1155/2022/5118362. eCollection 2022.
4
Comparing the insertion and ventilation of laryngeal mask airway according to the patient's head position and muscle relaxation use. A prospective clinical trial.根据患者头部位置和肌肉松弛剂使用情况比较喉罩气道的插入和通气。一项前瞻性临床试验。
Saudi Med J. 2019 Jul;40(7):687-693. doi: 10.15537/smj.2019.7.24299.
5
Head elevation by 3 vs. 6 cm in ProSeal laryngeal mask airway insertion: a randomized controlled trial.在使用ProSeal喉罩气道插入时头部抬高3厘米与6厘米的比较：一项随机对照试验。
BMC Anesthesiol. 2016 Aug 5;16(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s12871-016-0220-3.
6
Airway Assessment for Office Sedation/Anesthesia.门诊镇静/麻醉的气道评估
Anesth Prog. 2015 Summer;62(2):74-80; quiz 80-1. doi: 10.2344/0003-3006-62.2.74.
7
Comparison of the proseal, supreme, and i-gel SAD in gynecological laparoscopic surgeries.妇科腹腔镜手术中Proseal喉罩、Supreme喉罩和I-gel喉罩的比较。
ScientificWorldJournal. 2015;2015:634320. doi: 10.1155/2015/634320. Epub 2015 Feb 23.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparison between the index finger insertion and catheter-guided insertion techniques for airway placement of a ProSeal(TM) laryngeal mask by inexperienced personnel.
Korean J Anesthesiol. 2009 Jun;56(6):634-638. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2009.56.6.634.
2
The sniffing position provides greater occipito-atlanto-axial angulation than simple head extension: a radiological study.嗅闻位比单纯头部伸展提供更大的枕骨-寰椎-枢椎角度：一项影像学研究。
Can J Anaesth. 2007 Feb;54(2):129-33. doi: 10.1007/BF03022009.
3
A comparison of the ProSeal laryngeal mask and the laryngeal tube in spontaneously breathing anesthetized patients.在自主呼吸的麻醉患者中比较ProSeal喉罩和喉管。
Anesth Analg. 2003 Feb;96(2):600-5, table of contents. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200302000-00054.
4
A comparison of the upper lip bite test (a simple new technique) with modified Mallampati classification in predicting difficulty in endotracheal intubation: a prospective blinded study.上唇咬试验（一种简单的新技术）与改良Mallampati分类法在预测气管插管困难方面的比较：一项前瞻性盲法研究。
Anesth Analg. 2003 Feb;96(2):595-9, table of contents. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200302000-00053.
5
Randomized study comparing the "sniffing position" with simple head extension for laryngoscopic view in elective surgery patients.在择期手术患者中比较“嗅物位”与单纯头部后仰对喉镜视野影响的随机研究。
Anesthesiology. 2001 Oct;95(4):836-41. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200110000-00009.
6
Study of the "sniffing position" by magnetic resonance imaging.通过磁共振成像对“嗅吸位”的研究。
Anesthesiology. 2001 Jan;94(1):83-6. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200101000-00017.
7
The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: A randomized, crossover study with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed, anesthetized patients.ProSeal喉罩气道：在麻痹、麻醉患者中与标准喉罩气道进行的一项随机交叉研究。
Anesthesiology. 2000 Jul;93(1):104-9. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200007000-00019.
8
Mallampati classification and laryngeal mask airway insertion.马兰帕蒂分级与喉罩置入术
Anaesthesia. 1993 Apr;48(4):347. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1993.tb06968.x.
9
A proposed fiber-optic scoring system to standardize the assessment of laryngeal mask airway position.一种用于标准化喉罩气道位置评估的光纤评分系统提案。
Anesth Analg. 1993 Feb;76(2):457.
10
Laryngeal mask airway insertion. A comparison of the standard versus neutral position in normal patients with a view to its use in cervical spine instability.
Anaesthesia. 1993 Aug;48(8):670-1. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1993.tb07176.x.

比较根据头位和困难气道的存在情况，喉罩 ProSeal 插入的简易程度和纤维光学评分。

Comparison of the ease of laryngeal mask airway ProSeal insertion and the fiberoptic scoring according to the head position and the presence of a difficult airway.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

Korean J Anesthesiol. 2011 Apr;60(4):244-9. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2011.60.4.244. Epub 2011 Apr 26.

DOI:10.4097/kjae.2011.60.4.244
PMID:21602973
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3092958/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The sniffing position is recommended for conventional laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion. However, there has been a high success rate of LMA insertion with the head in the neutral position. The effect of a difficult airway on the ease of LMA insertion is not clear. In this study, we compared the ease of LMA ProSeal™ (PLMA) insertion and the fiberoptic scoring according to the head position and the presence of a difficult airway.

METHODS

After obtaining informed consent from the subjects, we enrolled 144 adult patients (age range: 18-65) with an ASA physical status 1 or 2. After evaluation of the airway, all the patients were grouped into the EA (easy airway) group (n = 68) and the DA (difficult airway) group (n = 76). According to the head position, each group was divided into the EA-SE (extension) group (n = 35), the EA-SN (sniffing) group (n = 33), the DA-SE group (n = 39) and the DA-SN group (n = 37). The success rate and insertion time at the first attempt were evaluated. The position of the PLMA was fiberoptically scored from the mask aperture of the airway tube in the original head position. After the head position was changed to the sniffing and neutral positions in the SE and SN group, respectively, the position of PLMA was re-evaluated fiberoptically.

RESULTS

The success rate and insertion time at the first attempt and the fiberoptic score showed no significant difference among the groups. After head position was changed, there were no significant changes in the fiberopitc scores.

CONCLUSIONS

A difficult airway and the head position had no influence on the ease of PLMA insertion and the fiberopic score. Therefore, the head position can be selected according to the individual patient's situation.

摘要

背景

推荐嗅探位用于常规喉罩气道（LMA）插入。然而，头部处于中立位时 LMA 插入成功率也很高。困难气道对 LMA 插入难易程度的影响尚不清楚。在这项研究中，我们根据头位和困难气道的存在，比较了 LMA ProSeal™（PLMA）插入的难易程度和纤维光学评分。

方法

在获得受试者的知情同意后，我们纳入了 144 名年龄在 18-65 岁之间的 ASA 身体状况 1 或 2 级的成年患者。在气道评估后，所有患者分为 EA（易气道）组（n=68）和 DA（困难气道）组（n=76）。根据头位，每组分为 EA-SE（伸展）组（n=35）、EA-SN（嗅探）组（n=33）、DA-SE 组（n=39）和 DA-SN 组（n=37）。评估首次尝试的成功率和插入时间。在原始头位下，通过气道管的面罩孔对 PLMA 的位置进行纤维光学评分。在 SE 和 SN 组分别将头位改为嗅探位和中立位后，重新进行 PLMA 位置的纤维光学评估。

结果

各组间首次尝试的成功率、插入时间和纤维光学评分均无显著差异。改变头位后，纤维光学评分无明显变化。

结论

困难气道和头位对 PLMA 插入的难易程度和纤维光学评分无影响。因此，可根据患者个体情况选择头位。