Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Paediatr Anaesth. 2024 Nov;34(11):1154-1161. doi: 10.1111/pan.14982. Epub 2024 Aug 28.
High-flow nasal oxygenation is reported to prolong duration of apnea while maintaining adequate oxygen saturation with the mouth closed. Also, buccal oxygenation is known to have similar effects in obese adults. We compared the effect of these two methods on prolongation of acceptable apnea time in pediatric patients with their mouth open.
Thirty-eight patients, aged 0-10 years were randomly allocated to either the high-flow nasal oxygenation group (n = 17) or the buccal oxygenation group (n = 21). After induction of anesthesia including neuromuscular blockade, manual ventilation was initiated until the expiratory oxygen concentration reached 90%. Subsequently, ventilation was paused, and the patient's head was extended, and mouth was opened. The HFNO group received 2 L·min·kg of oxygen, and the BO group received 0.5 L·min·kg of oxygen. We set a target apnea time according to previous literature. When the apnea time reached the target, we defined the case as "success" in prolongation of safe apnea time and resumed ventilation. When the pulse oximetry decreased to 92% before the target apnea time, it was recorded as "failure" and rescue ventilation was given.
The success rate of safe apnea prolongation was 100% in the high-flow nasal oxygenation group compared to 76% in the buccal oxygenation group (p = .04). Oxygen reserve index, end-tidal or transcutaneous carbon dioxide partial pressure, and pulse oximetry did not differ between groups.
High-flow nasal oxygenation is effective in maintaining appropriate arterial oxygen saturation during apnea even in children with their mouth open and is superior to buccal oxygenation. Buccal oxygenation may be a good alternative when high-flow nasal oxygenation is not available.
据报道,高流量鼻氧疗可延长患者闭口状态下的呼吸暂停时间,同时保持氧饱和度充足。此外,有研究表明颊部给氧在肥胖成人中也具有类似的效果。我们比较了这两种方法在张口状态下延长儿科患者可接受的呼吸暂停时间的效果。
将 38 名年龄 0-10 岁的患者随机分配至高流量鼻氧疗组(n=17)或颊部给氧组(n=21)。在全身麻醉诱导包括肌松后,行手动通气,直至呼气氧浓度达到 90%。随后暂停通气,将患者头部伸直,张口。高流量鼻氧疗组给予 2 L·min·kg 的氧气,颊部给氧组给予 0.5 L·min·kg 的氧气。我们根据先前的文献设定目标呼吸暂停时间。当呼吸暂停时间达到目标时,我们将延长安全呼吸暂停时间的病例定义为成功,并恢复通气。当脉搏血氧饱和度在达到目标呼吸暂停时间前降至 92%时,记录为失败,并给予抢救性通气。
高流量鼻氧疗组的安全呼吸暂停延长成功率为 100%,而颊部给氧组为 76%(p=0.04)。两组间的氧储备指数、潮气末或经皮二氧化碳分压以及脉搏血氧饱和度无差异。
即使在张口的儿童中,高流量鼻氧疗也能有效维持呼吸暂停期间的适当动脉氧饱和度,效果优于颊部给氧。当无法使用高流量鼻氧疗时,颊部给氧可能是一种较好的替代方法。