Suppr超能文献

LMA ProtectorTM 与 LMA SupremeTM 的咽腔漏气压:一项前瞻性、随机、对照临床试验。

Oropharyngeal leak pressure of the LMA Protector™ vs the LMA Supreme™; a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial.

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesia, Schulthess Clinic, Zurich, Switzerland.

Research and Development Department, Schulthess Clinic, Zurich, Switzerland.

出版信息

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2019 Mar;63(3):322-328. doi: 10.1111/aas.13256. Epub 2018 Sep 19.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Clinical characteristics such as oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and ventilation peak pressure are important factors for successful use of supraglottic airway devices in general anaesthesia. We hypothesized that the LMA Protector™ compared to the LMA Supreme™ may develop a higher OLP, which could be of clinical significance.

METHODS

Ninety-six patients were randomized to the LMA Protector™ or LMA Supreme™ groups. We measured oropharyngeal leak pressure within 5 minutes after insertion of the supraglottic airway device with a standardized cuff pressure at 60 cm H O. Secondary parameters, such as insertion time of the supraglottic airway device, the number of attempts inserting the supraglottic airway device and the gastric tube, volume of gastric contents, and maximum airway pressure, as well as pulse oximetry throughout the operation were measured. Further, blood staining after removal of the supraglottic airway device and postoperative airway morbidity 3 hours after surgery were determined.

RESULTS

The mean difference of oropharyngeal leak pressure was 5.2 (95% CI 2.8-7.6), ie, 30.9 (7.4) cmH O for the LMA Protector™ vs 25.6 (4.4) cmH O for the LMA Supreme™ (P < 0.001; mean(SD)). Similarly, there was a mean difference between OLP and maximal ventilation peak pressure 5.6 (95% CI 3.1-8.2) ie 19.6 (7.7) cmH O for the LMA Protector™ vs 14.0 (4.4) cmH O for the LMA Supreme™ (P < 0.001). No difference was found between the groups for other secondary parameters, as well as postoperative airway morbidity.

CONCLUSION

The LMA Protector™ enabled a higher OLP compared to the LMA Supreme™. This finding may be important for patients requiring a higher peak pressure for sufficient supraglottic airway device ventilation.

摘要

背景

口咽漏气压(OLP)和通气峰压等临床特征是全身麻醉中使用声门上气道装置成功的重要因素。我们假设 LMA Protector™ 与 LMA Supreme™ 相比,可能会产生更高的 OLP,这可能具有临床意义。

方法

96 名患者随机分为 LMA Protector™ 或 LMA Supreme™ 组。我们在插入声门上气道装置后 5 分钟内,以标准化的 60cmH 2 O 袖带压力测量口咽漏气压。次要参数,如声门上气道装置的插入时间、插入声门上气道装置的次数和胃管、胃内容物的体积以及最大气道压力,以及整个手术过程中的脉搏血氧饱和度,也进行了测量。此外,还确定了移除声门上气道装置后的血液染色情况和术后 3 小时的气道发病率。

结果

OLP 的平均差异为 5.2(95%CI 2.8-7.6),即 LMA Protector™ 为 30.9(7.4)cmH 2 O,LMA Supreme™ 为 25.6(4.4)cmH 2 O(P<0.001;均值(SD))。同样,OLP 和最大通气峰压之间的平均差异为 5.6(95%CI 3.1-8.2),即 LMA Protector™ 为 19.6(7.7)cmH 2 O,LMA Supreme™ 为 14.0(4.4)cmH 2 O(P<0.001)。两组之间的其他次要参数以及术后气道发病率无差异。

结论

与 LMA Supreme™ 相比,LMA Protector™ 可实现更高的 OLP。对于需要更高峰值压力以获得足够的声门上气道装置通气的患者,这一发现可能很重要。

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