首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Medicina >Evaluation of Different Positive End-Expiratory Pressures Using Supreme™ Airway Laryngeal Mask during Minor Surgical Procedures in Children
【2h】

Evaluation of Different Positive End-Expiratory Pressures Using Supreme™ Airway Laryngeal Mask during Minor Surgical Procedures in Children

机译:在儿童轻微外科手术过程中使用Supreme™呼吸道喉面膜评估不同阳性呼气压力

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

Background and objectives: The laryngeal mask is the method of choice for airway management in children during minor surgical procedures. There is a paucity of data regarding optimal management of mechanical ventilation in these patients. The Supreme™ airway laryngeal mask offers the option to insert a gastric tube to empty the stomach contents of air and/or gastric juice. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the impact of positive end-expiratory positive pressure (PEEP) levels on ventilation parameters and gastric air insufflation during general anesthesia in children using pressure-controlled ventilation with laryngeal mask. Materials and Methods: An observational trial was carried out in 67 children aged between 1 and 11 years. PEEP levels of 0, 3 and 5 mbar were tested for 5 min in each patient during surgery and compared with ventilation parameters (dynamic compliance (mL/cmH2O), etCO2 (mmHg), peak pressure (mbar), tidal volume (mL), respiratory rate (per minute), FiO2 and gastric air (mL)) were measured at each PEEP. Air was aspirated from the stomach at the start of the sequence of measurements and at the end. Results: Significant differences were observed for the ventilation parameters: dynamic compliance (PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 3: p < 0.0001, PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001, PEEP 3 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001), peak pressure (PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 3: p < 0.0001, PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001, PEEP 3 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001) and tidal volume (PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 3: p = 0.0048, PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001, PEEP 3 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001). All parameters increased significantly with higher PEEP, with the exception of etCO2 (significant decrease) and respiratory rate (no significant difference). We also showed different values for air quantity in the comparisons between the different PEEP levels (PEEP 5: 2.8 ± 3.9 mL, PEEP 3: 1.8 ± 3.0 mL; PEEP 0: 1.6 ± 2.3 mL) with significant differences between PEEP 5 and PEEP 3 (p = 0.0269) and PEEP 5 and PEEP 0 (p = 0.0209). Conclusions: Our data suggest that ventilation with a PEEP of 5 mbar might be more lung protective in children using the Supreme™ airway laryngeal mask, although gastric air insufflation increased with higher PEEP. We recommend the use of a laryngeal mask with the option of inserting a gastric tube to evacuate potential gastric air.
机译:背景和目标:喉面罩是在小型外科手术过程中儿童的气道管理选择的选择方法。缺乏关于这些患者机械通气的最佳管理的数据。 Supreme™Airway Laryngeal面罩提供插入胃管以清空空气和/或胃液的胃含量的选项。该调查的目的是评估使用喉部掩模的压力控制通气的儿童的全身麻醉期间对阳性呼气阳性压力(PEEP)水平对通气参数和胃空气的影响。材料和方法:在1至11岁以下的67名儿童中进行了观察试验。在手术期间在每位患者中测试0,3和5毫巴的窥柱水平,与通风参数(动态顺应性(ml / cmH 2 O),etco2(mmHg),峰值压力(mb),潮气量(ml)相比,在每个窥视下测量呼吸速率(每分钟),FiO 2和胃空气(ml))。在测量序列的开始和最后,从胃中吸出空气。结果:通风参数观察到显着差异:动态顺应性(窥视5与窥视3:P <0.0001,Peep 5 Vs.Peep 0:P <0.0001,Peep 3与Peep 0:P <0.0001),峰值压力(窥视5与窥视3:P <0.0001,PEEP 5 VS. PEEP 0:P <0.0001,PEEP 3对窥视0:P <0.0001)和潮气量(PEEP 5 Vs. PEEP 3:P = 0.0048,PEEP 5与Peep 0:P <0.0001,PEEP 3 VS.PEEP 0:P <0.0001)。所有参数大大增加,较高的窥视显着增加,除了ETCO2(显着降低)和呼吸率(无显着差异)。我们还展示了不同窥视水平之间的比较中的空气量的不同价值(窥视5:2.​​8±3.9ml,窥视3:1.8±3.0ml;窥视0:1.6±2.3 ml),窥视5和Peep 3之间具有显着差异的差异(p = 0.0269)和窥视5和窥视0(p = 0.0209)。结论:我们的数据表明,使用Supreme™Airway Laryngeal面膜的儿童垂直于5毫巴的通风可能更多,尽管胃空气吹气随着更高的窥视而增加。我们建议使用喉头面膜,选择插入胃管以抽空潜在的胃空气。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 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