LMA ProSeal（TM）与 i-Gel（TM）在通气儿童中的比较：使用 2 号面罩的随机交叉研究。
LMA ProSeal(TM) vs. i-Gel(TM) in ventilated children: a randomised, crossover study using the size 2 mask.
机构信息
Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
出版信息
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012 Nov;56(10):1321-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2012.02765.x. Epub 2012 Sep 4.
BACKGROUND
The Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) ProSeal(TM) and the i-Gel(TM) are two extraglottic devices with either an inflatable cuff or a non-inflatable cuff.
AIM
We test the hypothesis that oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic position of the airway tube differ between the size 2 LMA ProSeal(TM) and the i-Gel(TM) in non-paralysed ventilated children.
METHODS
Fifty-one children aged 1.5-6 years weighing 10-25 kg were studied using a crossover design. Anaesthesia was with remifentanil/propofol mixture. The LMA ProSeal(TM) and the i-Gel(TM) were inserted into each patient in random order.
RESULTS
Oropharyngeal leak pressure for the LMA ProSeal(TM) and the i-Gel(TM) was similar at 22 (5) and 21 (5) cm H(2) O, respectively. Fiberoptic position of the airway tube for the LMA ProSeal(TM) and the i-Gel(TM) was similar, with the vocal cords visible from the distal airway tube in 94% and 96%, respectively.
CONCLUSION
We conclude that oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic position of the airway tube are similar for the size 2 LMA ProSeal(TM) and i-Gel(TM) in non-paralysed ventilated children.
背景
喉罩气道（LMA）ProSeal（TM）和 i-Gel（TM）是两种具有可充气或不可充气套囊的外置型通气道。
目的
我们通过测试假设，来检验非肌松通气患儿中，大小为 2 号的 LMA ProSeal（TM）和 i-Gel（TM）的口咽漏气压和气道管的纤维光学位置是否存在差异。
方法
51 名年龄 1.5-6 岁、体重 10-25kg 的患儿，采用交叉设计进行研究。麻醉采用瑞芬太尼/丙泊酚混合液。以随机顺序将 LMA ProSeal（TM）和 i-Gel（TM）插入每个患儿。
结果
LMA ProSeal（TM）和 i-Gel（TM）的口咽漏气压分别为 22（5）cmH2O 和 21（5）cmH2O，两者相似。LMA ProSeal（TM）和 i-Gel（TM）的气道管纤维光学位置相似，声带从气道管的远端可见占 94%和 96%。
结论
我们得出结论，非肌松通气的儿童中，大小为 2 号的 LMA ProSeal（TM）和 i-Gel（TM）的口咽漏气压和气道管的纤维光学位置相似。
Zotero 插件