Schmutz Axel, Bohn Erich, Spaeth Johannes, Heinrich Sebastian
Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, 79106 Freiburg, Germany,
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2019 Mar 1;15:367-376. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S194728. eCollection 2019.
Supraglottic airway devices (SADs) are an essential second line tool during difficult airway management after failed tracheal intubation. Particularly for such challenging situations the handling of an SAD requires sufficient training. We hypothesized that the feasibility of manikin-based airway management with second generation SADs depends on the type of manikin.
Two airway manikins (TruCorp AirSim and Laerdal Resusci Anne Airway Trainer™) were evaluated by 80 experienced anesthesia providers using 5 different second generation SADs (LMA Supreme™ [LMA], Ambu AuraGain™, i-gel, KOO™-SGA and LTS-D™). The primary outcome of the study was feasibility of ventilation measured by assessment of the manikins' lung distention. As secondary outcome measures, oropharyngeal leakage pressure (OLP), ease of gastric tube insertion the insertion time, position and subjective assessments were evaluated.
Ventilation was feasible with all combinations of SAD and manikin. By contrast, an OLP exceeding 10 cm HO could be reached with most of the SADs in the TruCorp but with the LTS-D only in the Laerdal manikin. Gastric tube insertion was successful in above 90% in the Laerdal vs 87% in the TruCorp manikin (<0.009). Insertion times differed significantly between manikins. The SAD positions were better in the Laerdal manikin for LMA, Ambu, i-gel and LTS-D. Participant's assessments were superior in the Laerdal manikin for LMA, Ambu, i-gel and KOO-SGA.
Ventilation is possible with all combinations. However, manikins are variable in their ability to adequately represent additional functions of second generation SADs. In order to achieve the best performance during training, the airway manikin should be chosen depending on the SAD in question.
声门上气道装置(SADs)是气管插管失败后困难气道管理中的重要二线工具。特别是在这种具有挑战性的情况下,操作SAD需要充分的培训。我们假设使用第二代SADs进行基于人体模型的气道管理的可行性取决于人体模型的类型。
80名经验丰富的麻醉提供者使用5种不同的第二代SADs(LMA Supreme™[LMA]、Ambu AuraGain™、i-gel、KOO™-SGA和LTS-D™)对两种气道人体模型(TruCorp AirSim和Laerdal Resusci Anne Airway Trainer™)进行了评估。该研究的主要结果是通过评估人体模型的肺扩张来衡量通气的可行性。作为次要结果指标,评估了口咽漏气压(OLP)、胃管插入的难易程度、插入时间、位置和主观评估。
所有SAD与人体模型的组合都能实现通气。相比之下,大多数SADs在TruCorp人体模型中可达到超过10 cm HO的OLP,但LTS-D仅在Laerdal人体模型中能达到。在Laerdal人体模型中胃管插入成功率高于90%,而在TruCorp人体模型中为87%(<0.009)。人体模型之间的插入时间差异显著。对于LMA、Ambu、i-gel和LTS-D,Laerdal人体模型中的SAD位置更好。对于LMA、Ambu、i-gel和KOO-SGA,参与者在Laerdal人体模型中的评估更好。
所有组合都能实现通气。然而,人体模型在充分体现第二代SADs附加功能的能力方面存在差异。为了在培训期间获得最佳性能,应根据所使用的SAD选择气道人体模型。