Suppr超能文献

三种第二代声门上气道装置在小儿腹腔镜手术中口咽漏压的比较。

Comparison of the oropharyngeal leak pressure between three second generation supraglottic airway devices during laparoscopic surgery in pediatric patients.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, AIIMS, Patna, India.

Department of Trauma & Emergency, AIIMS, Patna, India.

出版信息

Paediatr Anaesth. 2022 Jul;32(7):843-850. doi: 10.1111/pan.14447. Epub 2022 Apr 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown Proseal LMA and I gel similar to endotracheal intubation in ventilatory ability in pediatric laparoscopic surgeries.

AIMS

The primary aim of this study was to assess whether there is a significant difference in the oropharyngeal leak pressure between Ambu Auragrain, I-gel, and Proseal LMA during pediatric laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial, 90 male patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I aged between 6 months and 10 years who were scheduled for laparoscopic single-sided inguinal hernia repair were recruited and randomly allocated to three groups in which airway was secured with Ambu Auragain, I gel, or Proseal LMA. The primary outcome was oropharyngeal leak pressure. The secondary outcomes were peak pressures before and after pneumoperitoneum, fiberoptic view, insertion attempts, insertion time, manipulations, perioperative and postoperative anesthesia-related problems. Continuous variables were compared using the one-way analysis of variance or the Kruskal-Wallis test with post hoc Turkey analysis. Categorical and ordinal data were compared using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Oropharyngeal leak pressure before pneumoperitoneum was higher with I gel as compared to Ambu Auragain (27.36 ± 5.72 cm of H O vs 23.56 ± 5.72 cm of H O) (p = .021) and PLMA (27.36 ± 5.72 cm of H O vs 23.24 ± 4.35 cm of H O) (p = .011). Oropharyngeal leak pressure after pneumoperitoneum was also higher with I gel as compared to Ambu Auragain (31.58 ± 4.35 cm of H O vs 26.83 ± 5.00 cm of H O) (p = .001) and Proseal LMA (31.58 ± 4.35 cm of H O vs 27.03 ± 3.80 cm of H O) (p = .002). Oropharyngeal leak pressures of Ambu Auragain and Proseal LMA were comparable. Postoperative complications were similar in all the supraglottic airway devices. No regurgitation or aspiration-related problem was observed in our study.

CONCLUSION

I gel had a higher oropharyngeal leak pressure than the other two supraglottic airway devices and therefore may represent a better choice in situations where higher ventilatory pressures may be necessary, for example, in extremes of weight trendelenburg position, etc. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: Clinical trial registry of India (CTRI/2018/11/016445).

摘要

背景

先前的研究表明,在小儿腹腔镜手术中,Proseal LMA 和 I-gel 与气管内插管在通气能力方面相似。

目的

本研究的主要目的是评估在小儿腹腔镜手术中,Ambu Auragrain、I-gel 和 Proseal LMA 之间的咽腔漏气压是否存在显著差异。

方法

在这项随机对照试验中,我们招募了 90 名美国麻醉医师协会身体状况 I 级的男性患者,年龄在 6 个月至 10 岁之间,计划进行单侧腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术。将他们随机分配到三组,分别使用 Ambu Auragain、I-gel 或 Proseal LMA 来确保气道通畅。主要结局是咽腔漏气压。次要结局是气腹前后的峰值压力、纤维光学视野、插入尝试、插入时间、操作、围手术期和术后与麻醉相关的问题。连续变量采用单因素方差分析或 Kruskal-Wallis 检验,并用事后 Tukey 分析进行比较。分类和有序数据采用卡方检验或 Fisher 确切检验进行比较。

结果

在气腹前,I-gel 的咽腔漏气压高于 Ambu Auragain(27.36±5.72cmH2O 比 23.56±5.72cmH2O)(p=0.021)和 Proseal LMA(27.36±5.72cmH2O 比 23.24±4.35cmH2O)(p=0.011)。气腹后,I-gel 的咽腔漏气压也高于 Ambu Auragain(31.58±4.35cmH2O 比 26.83±5.00cmH2O)(p=0.001)和 Proseal LMA(31.58±4.35cmH2O 比 27.03±3.80cmH2O)(p=0.002)。Ambu Auragain 和 Proseal LMA 的咽腔漏气压相似。所有声门上气道装置的术后并发症相似。在我们的研究中,没有观察到反流或吸入相关的问题。

结论

I-gel 的咽腔漏气压高于其他两种声门上气道装置,因此在需要更高通气压力的情况下(例如极端的头低位、等),它可能是更好的选择。

临床试验注册号

印度临床试验注册中心(CTRI/2018/11/016445)。

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