Suppr超能文献

声门上气道装置与带通道或不带通道的叶片式视频喉镜用于俯卧位意外拔管的比较:一项随机交叉人体模型研究。

Supraglottic airway device versus a channeled or non-channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope for accidental extubation in the prone position: A randomized crossover manikin study.

作者信息

Oshika Hiroyuki, Koyama Yukihide, Taguri Masataka, Maruyama Koichi, Hirabayashi Go, Yamada Shoko Merrit, Kohno Masashi, Andoh Tomio

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Mizonokuchi Hospital, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Kawasaki Department of Biostatics, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama Department of Neurosurgery, Mizonokuchi Hospital, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Kawasaki Department of Anesthesia, Tomei Atsugi Hospital, Atsugi, Japan.

出版信息

Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Jun;97(25):e11190. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011190.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

It is very rare but challenging to perform emergency airway management for accidental extubation in a patient whose head and neck are fixed in the prone position when urgently turning the patient to the supine position would be unsafe. The authors hypothesized that tracheal intubation with a videolaryngoscope would allow effective airway rescue in this situation compared with a supraglottic airway device and designed a randomized crossover manikin study to test this hypothesis.

METHODS

The authors compared airway rescue performances of the 3 devices-the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA; Teleflex Medical, Westmeath, Ireland) as a reference; the Pentax AWS (AWS; Nihon Kohden, Tokyo, Japan) as a channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope; and the McGRATH videolaryngoscope (McGRATH; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) as a nonchanneled blade type in a manikin fixed to the operating table in the prone position. Twenty-one anesthesiologists performed airway management on the prone manikin with the 3 devices, and the time required for intubation/ventilation and the success rates were recorded.

RESULTS

The median (range) intubation/ventilation times with the PLMA, AWS, and McGRATH were 24.5 (13.5-89.5) s, 29.9 (17.1-79.8) s, and 46.7 (21.9-211.7) s, respectively. There was no significant difference in intubation/ventilation times between the PLMA and AWS. The AWS permitted significantly faster tracheal intubation than did the McGRATH (P = 0.006). The success rates with the PLMA (100%) and AWS (100%) were significantly greater than that with the McGRATH (71.4%). Airway management performance of the PLMA and AWS was comparable between devices and better than that of the McGRATH in the prone position.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering that tracheal intubation can provide a more secure airway and more stable ventilation than the PLMA, re-intubation with a channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope such as the AWS may be a useful method of airway rescue for accidental extubation in patients in the prone position.

摘要

背景

对于头颈部固定于俯卧位的患者,若紧急翻转至仰卧位不安全,进行意外拔管后的紧急气道管理极为罕见且具有挑战性。作者推测,在这种情况下,与声门上气道装置相比,使用视频喉镜进行气管插管可实现有效的气道救援,并设计了一项随机交叉人体模型研究来验证这一假设。

方法

作者比较了三种装置的气道救援性能——作为对照的ProSeal喉罩气道(PLMA;泰利福医疗公司,爱尔兰韦斯特米斯);作为带通道叶片式视频喉镜的宾得AWS(AWS;日本光电,东京,日本);以及作为无通道叶片式的麦格拉思视频喉镜(麦格拉思;美敦力公司,明尼阿波利斯,明尼苏达州),在固定于手术台上的俯卧位人体模型上进行测试。21名麻醉医生使用这三种装置对俯卧位人体模型进行气道管理,并记录插管/通气所需时间及成功率。

结果

PLMA、AWS和麦格拉思的插管/通气时间中位数(范围)分别为24.5(13.5 - 89.5)秒、29.9(17.1 - 79.8)秒和46.7(21.9 - 211.7)秒。PLMA和AWS之间的插管/通气时间无显著差异。AWS进行气管插管的速度明显快于麦格拉思(P = 0.006)。PLMA(100%)和AWS(100%)的成功率显著高于麦格拉思(71.4%)。在俯卧位时,PLMA和AWS的气道管理性能在不同装置间相当,且优于麦格拉思。

结论

考虑到气管插管比PLMA能提供更安全的气道和更稳定的通气,使用如AWS这种带通道叶片式视频喉镜进行再次插管,可能是俯卧位患者意外拔管后气道救援的一种有效方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/044e/6023683/9ac6778e773c/medi-97-e11190-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验