Suppr超能文献

两种喉罩气道的比较研究:在接受择期手术的麻醉瘫痪成年患者中,食管引流型喉罩气道与第三代喉罩气道的比较

Comparative Study of Two Laryngeal Mask Airways: Proseal Laryngeal Mask Airway and Supreme Laryngeal Mask Airway in Anesthetized Paralyzed Adults Undergoing Elective Surgery.

作者信息

Gill Ravneet Kaur, Tarat Abhijit, Pathak Debagopal, Dutta Suneeta

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Silchar Medical College, Silchar, Assam, India.

出版信息

Anesth Essays Res. 2017 Jan-Mar;11(1):23-27. doi: 10.4103/0259-1162.177184.

Abstract

CONTEXT

Supraglottic airway devices can act as an alternative to endotracheal intubation in both normal and difficult airway. LMA Proseal (P-LMA) and LMA Supreme (S-LMA) alongwith acting as effective ventilating device, provide port for gastric drainage.

AIM

The objective of this study was to compare the two devices for effective ventilation and complications.

SETTING AND DESIGN

A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Methods: 100 patients of ASA grade I-II undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia were included after ethical committee clearance and written consent. Patients were randomly allocated size 4 P-LMA (Group P) or S-LMA (Group S) (50 patients in each group). Insertion attempt, insertion time, oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and complications were compared.

RESULTS

There was no difference demographically. The first insertion attempts were successful in 92% with P-LMA and 96% with S-LMA. Insertion time was faster in S-LMA. The mean OLP was 24.04 cmH2O in Group and 20.05 cmH2O in Group S. Complications were cough, mild blood staining.

CONCLUSION

Both can act as an effective ventilatory devices. But where LMA Proseal provides a more effective glottic seal by having a greater OLP, single use LMA Supreme provides acceptable glottic seal with easier and faster insertion, therefore, it can be accepted as better alternative to LMA Proseal.

摘要

背景

声门上气道装置可作为正常气道和困难气道中气管插管的替代方法。喉罩通气道(LMA)Proseal型(P-LMA)和LMA Supreme型(S-LMA)除了作为有效的通气装置外,还提供胃引流口。

目的

本研究的目的是比较这两种装置的有效通气情况及并发症。

设置与设计

在一家三级护理教学医院进行了一项前瞻性、随机、单盲研究。方法:在伦理委员会批准并获得书面同意后,纳入100例ASA I-II级在全身麻醉下接受择期手术的患者。患者被随机分配使用4号P-LMA(P组)或S-LMA(S组)(每组50例患者)。比较插入尝试、插入时间、口咽漏气压(OLP)和并发症。

结果

两组在人口统计学方面无差异。P-LMA首次插入成功率为92%,S-LMA为96%。S-LMA的插入时间更快。P组的平均OLP为24.04 cmH₂O,S组为20.05 cmH₂O。并发症为咳嗽、轻度血染。

结论

两者均可作为有效的通气装置。但是,P-LMA通过具有更高的OLP提供更有效的声门密封,一次性使用的LMA Supreme提供可接受的声门密封,插入更容易、更快,因此,它可被认为是P-LMA更好的替代品。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/166f/5341671/6936514dd4a9/AER-11-23-g003.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验