Bansal Teena, Singhal Suresh, Mittal Himani
Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India.
Indian J Anaesth. 2020 Feb;64(2):97-102. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_584_19. Epub 2020 Feb 4.
Though manufacturer recommendations suggest use of specific endotracheal tube (ETT) with intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA) and air-Q intubating laryngeal airway (ILA), Parker Flex Tip tube introduced by J D Parker has certain advantages and is also cost-effective. This study was conducted to compare ILMA and air-Q ILA for intubation using Parker Flex Tip tube.
Patients of either gender, aged 18-60 years, scheduled for elective surgery requiring endotracheal intubation were included in this study. In group A ( = 55), blind intubation was done through ILMA using Parker Flex Tip tube and in group B ( = 55), blind intubation was done through air-Q ILA using Parker Flex Tip tube. Success rate, number of attempts, ease and a total time of intubation were recorded.
Intubation was successful in 54 patients (98.2%) in group A and in 46 patients (85.2%) in group B ( = 0.026). Intubation was significantly easy with ILMA ( = 0.048). Manoeuvres for intubation were used in 10.9% patients in group A while it was used in 27.8% patients in group B. Significantly, more manoeuvres were required with air-Q ILA for intubation ( = 0.026). Number of attempts for ETT placement ( = 0.092), insertion time of ETT (T) ( = 0.472) and total time taken for successful intubation ( = 0.526) were comparable in both the groups.
The intubating laryngeal mask airway was superior to the air-Q intubating laryngeal airway for blind intubation using Parker Flex Tip tube.
尽管制造商的建议表明，在使用插管喉罩气道（ILMA）和Air-Q插管喉气道（ILA）时应使用特定的气管内导管（ETT），但J D Parker推出的Parker Flex Tip导管具有一定优势且性价比高。本研究旨在比较使用Parker Flex Tip导管时ILMA和Air-Q ILA用于插管的情况。
本研究纳入年龄在18至60岁之间、计划进行需要气管插管的择期手术的男女患者。A组（n = 55）使用Parker Flex Tip导管通过ILMA进行盲插，B组（n = 55）使用Parker Flex Tip导管通过Air-Q ILA进行盲插。记录成功率、尝试次数、插管的难易程度和总插管时间。
A组54例患者（98.2%）插管成功，B组46例患者（85.2%）插管成功（P = 0.026）。使用ILMA插管明显更容易（P = 0.048）。A组10.9%的患者在插管时采用了操作手法，而B组为27.8%。显著地，使用Air-Q ILA插管需要更多的操作手法（P = 0.026）。两组在气管内导管放置的尝试次数（P = 0.092）、气管内导管插入时间（T）（P = 0.4天天棋牌72）和成功插管的总时间（P = 0.天天棋牌26）方面天天棋牌可比的天天棋牌
在使用Parker天天棋牌Tip导管进行盲插时，插管喉罩气道优于Air-Q插管喉气道。
