Ranieri Dante, Zinelli Fabio Riefel, Neubauer Adecir Geraldo, Schneider Andre P, do Nascimento Paulo
Department of Anesthesioloy, Hospital do Coração de Balneário Camboriu, Balneário Camboriu, SC, Brazil.
Department of Anesthesioloy, Hospital do Coração de Balneário Camboriu, Balneário Camboriu, SC, Brazil.
Braz J Anesthesiol. 2014 May-Jun;64(3):190-4. doi: 10.1016/j.bjane.2012.07.004. Epub 2014 Mar 7.
this study investigated the influence of anatomical predictors on difficult laryngoscopy and orotracheal intubation in obese patients by comparing Macintosh and Airtraq™ laryngoscopes.
from 132 bariatric surgery patients (body mass index ≥ 35 kgm(-1)), cervical perimeter, sternomental distance, interincisor distance, and Mallampati score were recorded. The patients were randomized into two groups according to whether a Macintosh (n=64) or an Airtraq™ (n=68) laryngoscope was used for tracheal intubation. Time required for intubation was the first outcome. Cormack-Lehane score, number of intubation attempts, the Macintosh blade used, any need for external tracheal compression or the use of gum elastic bougie were recorded. Intubation failure and strategies adopted were also registered.
intubation failed in two patients in the Macintosh laryngoscope group, and these patients were included as worst cases scenario. The intubation times were 36.9+22.8s and 13.7+3.1s for the Macintosh and Airtraq™ laryngoscope groups (p<0.01), respectively. Cormack-Lehane scores were also lower for the Airtraq™ group. One patient in the Macintosh group with intubation failure was quickly intubated with the Airtraq™. Cervical circumference (p<0.01) and interincisor distance (p<0.05) influenced the time required for intubation in the Macintosh group but not in the Airtraq™ group.
in obese patients despite increased neck circumference and limited mouth opening, the Airtraq™ laryngoscope affords faster tracheal intubation than the Macintosh laryngoscope, and it may serve as an alternative when conventional laryngoscopy fails.
本研究通过比较麦金托什喉镜和Airtraq™喉镜,探讨解剖学预测因素对肥胖患者困难喉镜检查和经口气管插管的影响。
记录132例肥胖手术患者(体重指数≥35kg/m²)的颈围、胸骨颏距离、门齿间距离和马兰帕蒂分级。根据气管插管时使用的是麦金托什喉镜(n=64)还是Airtraq™喉镜(n=68),将患者随机分为两组。插管所需时间是首要观察指标。记录科马克-莱汉内分级、插管尝试次数、使用的麦金托什喉镜叶片、是否需要外部气管按压或使用弹性橡胶探条。还记录插管失败情况及采取的策略。
麦金托什喉镜组有2例患者插管失败,这2例患者被纳入最差情况。麦金托什喉镜组和Airtraq™喉镜组的插管时间分别为36.9+22.8秒和13.7+3.1秒(p<0.01)。Airtraq™组的科马克-莱汉内分级也更低。麦金托什组1例插管失败的患者使用Airtraq™后迅速完成插管。颈围(p<0.01)和门齿间距离(p<0.05)影响麦金托什组的插管时间,但不影响Airtraq™组。
在肥胖患者中,尽管颈围增加且张口受限,但Airtraq™喉镜比麦金托什喉镜能更快地完成气管插管,当传统喉镜检查失败时,它可作为一种替代方法。