Tanigawa K, Shigematsu A
Department of Anesthesiology, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Prehosp Emerg Care. 1998 Apr-Jun;2(2):96-100. doi: 10.1080/10903129808958850.
This retrospective study was designed to determine the choice of airway devices used for nontraumatic, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients and to evaluate the success and failure of insertion and airway control/ventilation by three airway adjuncts, the Combitube, the esophageal gastric tube airway (EGTA), and the laryngeal mask (LM), which were used in conjunction with the bag-valve-mask (BVM) by emergency life-saving technicians (ELSTs) in Japan.
A survey of 1,085 ELSTs was performed to identify the type of airway devices, the success rates of airway insertion, the effectiveness of airway control/ventilation in comparison with the BVM prior to each airway insertion, and associated complications. The type of education for airway skills was also surveyed.
1,079 surveys were returned and 12,020 cases of cardiac arrest were studied. Choice of airway devices: BVM, 7,180 cases; EGTA, 545 cases; Combitube, 1,594 cases; and LM, 2,701 cases. Successful insertion rates on the first attempt: EGTA, 82.7%; Combitube, 82.4%; and LM, 72.5% (p < 0.0001). Failed insertions: EGTA, 8.2%; Combitube, 6.9%; and LM, 10.5% (p < 0.0001). Successful ventilation: EGTA, 71.0%; Combitube, 78.9%; and LM, 71.5% (p < 0.0004). Six cases of aspiration were reported in the LM group, whereas nine cases of soft-tissue injuries, including esophageal perforation, were reported in the Combitube group. 17.8% had vomited either prior or during airway placement.
The Combitube appears to be the most appropriate choice among the airway devices examined. However, serious injuries to the tissues, though they rarely occurred in the study, remain a major concern.
本回顾性研究旨在确定用于非创伤性院外心脏骤停患者的气道装置的选择,并评估三种气道辅助装置(食管气管联合导管、食管胃管气道(EGTA)和喉罩(LM))插入的成功率以及气道控制/通气的成败情况,这些装置由日本的急救技术人员(ELSTs)与袋阀面罩(BVM)联合使用。
对1085名ELSTs进行了一项调查,以确定气道装置的类型、气道插入的成功率、与每次气道插入前的BVM相比气道控制/通气的有效性以及相关并发症。还对气道技能的培训类型进行了调查。
共收回1079份调查问卷,研究了12020例心脏骤停病例。气道装置的选择:BVM,7180例;EGTA,545例;食管气管联合导管,1594例;喉罩,2701例。首次尝试成功插入率:EGTA,82.7%;食管气管联合导管,82.4%;喉罩,72.5%(p<0.0001)。插入失败率:EGTA,8.2%;食管气管联合导管,6.9%;喉罩,10.5%(p<0.0001)。通气成功情况:EGTA,71.0%;食管气管联合导管,78.9%;喉罩,71.5%(p<0.0004)。喉罩组报告了6例误吸,而食管气管联合导管组报告了9例软组织损伤,包括食管穿孔。17.8%的患者在气道放置前或放置过程中出现呕吐。
在所检查的气道装置中,食管气管联合导管似乎是最合适的选择。然而,尽管在研究中很少发生,但组织的严重损伤仍然是一个主要问题。