首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Medical Gas Research >Comparing the efficacy and safety of laryngeal mask airway streamlined liner of the pharyngeal airway and I-gel following tracheal extubation
【2h】

Comparing the efficacy and safety of laryngeal mask airway streamlined liner of the pharyngeal airway and I-gel following tracheal extubation

机译:比较气管拔管后喉罩气道流线型喉罩和I-gel的疗效和安全性

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Adverse events following surgical operations are common complications due to removal of tracheal tube in contrast to the tracheal intubation. Awareness about the new methods and strategies for tracheal tube extubation is necessary for a safe and successful extubation. Therefore, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of laryngeal mask airway (LMA), streamlined liner of the pharyngeal airway (SLIPA) and I-gel in extubation time of tracheal tube. A one-single randomized clinical trial was conducted in 105 eligible patients in three groups including LMA, SLIPA and I-gel. The patients were under surgery after general anesthesia with propofol (2–3 mg/kg) and fentanyl (1–2 μg/kg). Hemodynamic responses and extubation consequences including coughing rate, laryngospasm, airway obstruction, apnea, breath holding and straining of patients, vomiting, and need for re-intubation were recorded every 5 minutes since inserting of supraglottic airway devices (SADs) until patients restore consciousness. Analysis of data was conducted in SPSS software by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and ANOVA for repeated measurements tests. The overall successful insertion was 100% for LMA and I-Gel and this rate was 97.1% for SLIPA method. A significant decrease was observed in trend of hemodynamic responses in all three groups. Nevertheless, the MBP was lower in LMA group and lower HR was observed in I-Gel and higher HR occurred in SLIPA (P < 0.05). Three groups was same statistically regarding sore throat, vomiting, coughing, breath holding, apnea, laryngospasm, and re-intubation need (P > 0.05). However, the incidence rate of apnea, and laryngospasm, as well as re-intubation need in SLIPA group was 2.9%, respectively. LMA, I-GEL and SLIPA could be considered as useful and safe devices for ventilation control after tracheal tube removal at the end of operation. Three devices were same regarding to sore throat, vomiting, coughing, and breath holding. However, LMA showed lower side effects while SLIPA was related to more occurrences of apnea, laryngospasm, and re-intubation need.
机译:与气管插管相比,手术后的不良事件是由于气管插管切除引起的常见并发症。认识到气管插管的新方法和新策略对于安全成功地拔管是必要的。因此,我们的目的是评估在气管插管拔管时喉罩气道(LMA),咽喉气管的流线型衬管(SLIPA)和I-gel的安全性和有效性。在LMA,SLIPA和I-gel等三组中的105位合格患者中进行了一项单项随机临床试验。患者在全身麻醉后接受丙泊酚(2-3 mg / kg)和芬太尼(1-2μg/ kg)进行手术。自插入声门上气道装置(SADs)直到患者恢复意识为止,每5分钟记录一次血液动力学反应和拔管后果,包括咳嗽率,喉痉挛,气道阻塞,呼吸暂停,患者屏气和劳损,呕吐和需要再次插管。数据分析在SPSS软件中通过方差分析(ANOVA)和ANOVA进行重复测量测试。 LMA和I-Gel的总插入成功率为100%,而SLIPA方法的插入成功率为97.1%。在所有三组中,观察到血液动力学反应趋势显着降低。然而,LMA组的MBP较低,I-Gel组的HR较低,SLIPA组的HR较高(P <0.05)。三组在咽痛,呕吐,咳嗽,屏气,呼吸暂停,喉痉挛和再次插管需要方面在统计学上相同(P> 0.05)。但是,SLIPA组的呼吸暂停和喉痉挛的发生率以及再次插管的需求分别为2.9%。 LMA,I-GEL和SLIPA可被认为是在手术结束时拔除气管导管后进行通气控制的有用和安全的设备。喉咙痛,呕吐,咳嗽和屏气的三种方法相同。然而,LMA的副作用较低,而SLIPA则与呼吸暂停,喉痉挛和再次插管的发生率更高有关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号