Chalam Kolli S, Gupta Jyothi
Department of Anaesthesiology, Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Medical Sciences, Whitefield, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2016 Oct-Dec;32(4):515-518. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.194765.
Direct laryngoscopy is hazardous in patients with cervical posterior intervertebral disc prolapse (PIVD) as it may worsen the existing cord compression. To achieve smooth intubation, many adjuncts such as fiberoptic bronchoscope (FOB), video laryngoscopes, lighted stylets, and intubating laryngeal mask airways (ILMAs) are available. However, there is a paucity of literature comparing ILMA with fiberoptic intubation in patients with PIVD. Hence, this study was designed to compare the effectiveness of ILMA technique with FOB to accomplish endotracheal intubation in patients undergoing cervical discectomy.
Sixty patients of age group 20-60 years, of American Society of Anesthesiologists status I or II, were enrolled in this prospective and randomized study. They were allocated to one of the two groups, ILMA group and FOB group. The patients were intubated orally using either equipment, after dexmedetomidine premedication and induction of general anesthesia. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used to find the significance of study parameters on a categorical scale. Paired samples -test and Student's -test were used to find the significance of study parameters on a continuous scale. Significance was assessed at 5% level of significance.
Bronchoscopy was a faster method of securing airway as compared with ILMA (38.13 ± 11.52 vs. 29.83 ± 13.75 s). Tracheal intubation was successful in all 60 patients (100%), belonging to both groups.
ILMA and FOB were comparable with regards to ease of intubation in terms of time, the number of attempts and hemodynamic stability.
直接喉镜检查对于颈椎后椎间盘突出症(PIVD)患者具有危险性,因为这可能会加重现有的脊髓压迫。为实现顺利插管,有许多辅助工具可供使用,如纤维支气管镜(FOB)、视频喉镜、光棒和插管型喉罩气道(ILMA)。然而,在PIVD患者中,将ILMA与纤维光导插管进行比较的文献较少。因此,本研究旨在比较ILMA技术与FOB在颈椎间盘切除术患者中完成气管插管的有效性。
本前瞻性随机研究纳入了60例年龄在20 - 60岁、美国麻醉医师协会分级为I或II级的患者。他们被分配到两组之一,即ILMA组和FOB组。在给予右美托咪定预处理并诱导全身麻醉后,使用其中一种设备经口插管。采用卡方检验和Fisher精确检验来确定分类量表上研究参数的显著性。采用配对样本t检验和学生t检验来确定连续量表上研究参数的显著性。显著性评估水平为5%。
与ILMA相比,支气管镜检查是一种更快的确保气道安全的方法(38.13 ± 11.52秒对29.83 ± 13.75秒)。两组的所有60例患者(100%)气管插管均成功。
在插管的难易程度方面,包括时间、尝试次数和血流动力学稳定性,ILMA和FOB具有可比性。