首页> 外文期刊>Indian journal of Anaesthesia >Comparative study of Episure? AutoDetect? syringe versus glass syringe for identification of epidural space in lower thoracic epidural
【24h】

Comparative study of Episure? AutoDetect? syringe versus glass syringe for identification of epidural space in lower thoracic epidural

机译:比较研究Episure?自动侦测?注射器与玻璃注射器对比,以识别下胸膜硬膜外的硬膜外腔

获取原文
       

摘要

Background and Aims:Episure? AutoDetect? syringe (EAS), a spring-loaded syringe, is a new loss-of-resistance syringe used to identify epidural space. It has an advantage of subjective and objective confirmation in identifying epidural space over glass syringe (GS) for beginners. We compared the performance of EAS with that of GS for identifying epidural space in lower thoracic epidurals.Methods:A total of 120 American Society of Anesthesiolgists I-II patients aged 18–60 years requiring lower thoracic epidural analgesia for surgery were randomised into Group I (EAS): Epidural identified using EAS and Group II (GS) epidural identified with GS. Patient demographic data, depth to epidural space (cm), number of attempts, time to locate epidural space (s), inadvertent dural puncture and failed epidural analgesia were the parameters noted.Results:There were no differences in patient demographics or depth to the epidural space between the two groups. There were five failed blocks in the GS group and none in the EAS group (P = 0.0287). Similarly, there were five inadvertent dural punctures in the GS group and none in the EAS group (P = 0.0287). When epidural was identified in fewer attempts, the time needed to identify epidural space was quicker with EAS (P = 0.0012).Conclusion:Using EAS allowed reliable and quick identification of the epidural space in lower thoracic epidural technique as compared to use of glass syringe. There was no incidence of inadvertent dural puncture or failed blocks with the EAS.
机译:背景与目的:启示?自动侦测?注射器(EAS)是一种弹簧式注射器,是一种新型的阻力损失注射器,用于识别硬膜外腔。与初学者相比,在确定玻璃注射器(GS)的硬膜外腔时,它具有主观和客观确认的优势。我们将EAS和GS在下胸腔硬膜外腔中鉴别硬膜外腔的性能进行了比较。方法:将120例18-60岁需要行下胸腔硬膜外镇痛手术的美国麻醉师I-II患者随机分为I组。 (EAS):使用EAS识别的硬膜外麻醉;使用GS识别的II组(GS)硬膜外麻醉。患者的人口统计学数据,硬膜外腔深度(cm),尝试次数,硬膜外腔定位时间(s),硬膜穿刺无意和硬膜外镇痛失败是这些参数。结果:患者的人口统计学或深度没有差异两组之间的硬膜外腔。 GS组中有五个失败的模块,而EAS组中没有一个(P = 0.0287)。同样,GS组有5次无意的硬膜穿刺,而EAS组则无(P = 0.0287)。当尝试较少的硬膜外腔时,使用EAS识别硬膜外腔所需的时间更快(P = 0.0012)。结论:与使用玻璃注射器相比,使用EAS可以在较低的胸膜硬膜外技术中可靠,快速地识别硬膜外腔。 EAS无意外的硬膜穿刺或阻塞失败的发生。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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