Abdellatif Ashraf Abualhasan, Ali Monaz Abdulrahman
Middle East J Anaesthesiol. 2014 Feb;22(4):385-92.
Awake fiberoptic intubation is the gold standard for management of predicted difficult intubation. The purpose of this study was to test whether Glide Scope video laryngoscopy (GVL) will provide significant advantages over fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) for awake intubation in morbidly obese patients with predicted difficult intubation. We therefore tested the hypothesis that intubation using GVL is faster than intubation with FOB.
64 morbidly obese patients with predicted difficult intubation undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive awake oral intubation by either GVL or FOB. After airway topical anesthesia and sedation using target controlled remifentanil infusion to a Ramsay sedation scale of 3, wee compared the two devices for time to intubate, successful intubation on first attempt, glottic view using Cormack and Lehane score system, response of the patient to scope, patients satisfaction and incidence of postoperative sore throat and hoarseness.
Intubation time was 84 +/- 37.9 seconds and 73.6 +/- 31.1 seconds for FOB and GVL respectively. 75% of patients were successfully intubated on the first attempt with FOB compared to 80.6% with GVL. Grade I/II glottic view was reported with GVL in 96.7% of patients compared to 100% with FOB. The highest target concentration of remifentanil to maintain patients sedated during intubation was 2.4 +/- 0.6 ng/ml and 2.2 +/- 0.8 ng/ml in FOB and GVL respectively. No significant differences regarding maximum patient response to intubation, adverse effects or patient satisfaction were recorded between groups.
GVL can be used as a useful alternative to FOB in morbidly obese patients with predicted difficult intubation.
清醒纤维支气管镜引导插管是预计困难插管管理的金标准。本研究的目的是测试Glide Scope视频喉镜(GVL)在预计困难插管的肥胖患者清醒插管方面是否比纤维支气管镜(FOB)具有显著优势。因此,我们检验了使用GVL插管比使用FOB插管更快的假设。
64例预计困难插管且接受腹腔镜减肥手术的肥胖患者纳入本研究。患者被随机分配接受GVL或FOB清醒经口插管。在气道表面麻醉并使用瑞芬太尼靶控输注使Ramsay镇静评分达到3级后,我们比较了两种设备的插管时间、首次尝试插管成功率、使用Cormack和Lehane评分系统的声门视野、患者对喉镜的反应、患者满意度以及术后咽痛和声音嘶哑的发生率。
FOB和GVL的插管时间分别为84±37.9秒和73.6±31.1秒。FOB组75%的患者首次尝试插管成功,而GVL组为80.6%。GVL组96.7%的患者报告声门视野为I/II级,而FOB组为100%。FOB和GVL在插管期间维持患者镇静的瑞芬太尼最高靶浓度分别为2.4±0.6 ng/ml和2.2±0.8 ng/ml。两组之间在患者对插管的最大反应、不良反应或患者满意度方面未记录到显著差异。
在预计困难插管的肥胖患者中,GVL可作为FOB的有效替代方法。