首页> 外文期刊>Anaesthesia and intensive care >Gum elastic bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway.
【24h】

Gum elastic bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway.

机译:口香糖弹性引导,插入ProSeal喉罩面罩气道。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

We tested the hypothesis that gum elastic-bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway is more frequently successful than introducer tool guided insertion after failed digital insertion. One hundred anaesthetized patients (ASA 1-2, aged 18 to 80 years) were randomized for the second insertion attempt using either the gum elastic bougie-guided or introducer tool techniques. The bougie-guided technique involved priming the drain tube with the bougie, placing the bougie in the oesophagus using laryngoscope guidance, digital insertion along the palato-pharyngeal curve, and bougie removal. The introducer tool technique involved attaching the introducer tool, single-handed rotation along the palatopharyngeal curve, and introducer tool removal. Failed insertion was classified as (i) failed passage into the pharynx, (ii) malposition, or (iii) ineffective ventilation. Any blood staining was documented. Insertion was more frequently successful (50/50 vs 15/50, P=0.0002) and faster (35+/-17 s vs 54+/-45 s, mean+/-SD, P=0.006) with the bougie-guided technique. All failed insertions with the introducer tool technique were successful with the bougie-guided technique. The aetiology of failed insertion was similar for the digital and introducer tool techniques in 94% (33/35) of patients. There was no blood staining on the bougie, laryngoscope or introducer tool at removal, but blood staining was more common on the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway with the introducer tool technique (9/50 vs 2/50, P=0.03). We conclude that the gum elastic bougie-guided insertion has a higher success rate and causes less trauma than the insertion tool insertion technique after failed digital insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway.
机译:我们测试了以下假设:在数字插入失败后,口香糖弹性胸罩引导的ProSeal喉罩气道引导插入比导引器工具引导的插入更为成功。一百位麻醉患者(ASA 1-2,年龄18至80岁)被随机分配用于第二次插入尝试,方法是使用橡皮筋弹力引导系统或导引器工具技术。弹弓引导技术包括用弹弓引导引流管,使用喉镜引导将弹弓放置在食道中,沿咽曲线进行数字插入,并去除弹弓。导引器工具技术包括附加导引器工具,沿ary咽曲线的单手旋转以及导引器工具的拆除。插入失败的分类为(i)不能通过咽部,(ii)位置不正确或(iii)通气不良。记录任何血迹。用布吉导向技术更成功地插入(50/50 vs 15/50,P = 0.0002),并更快(35 +/- 17 s vs 54 +/- 45 s,平均值+/- SD,P = 0.006) 。引导器技术成功完成了所有使用导引工具技术的插入操作。 94%(33/35)的患者使用数字和导引工具技术失败的原因相似。弹簧罩,喉镜或导引工具在移除时没有血迹,但采用导引工具技术的ProSeal喉罩气道血迹更为常见(9/50 vs 2/50,P = 0.03)。我们得出的结论是,在ProSeal喉罩面罩气道数字插入失败后,口香糖弹性引导引导的插入比插入工具插入技术具有更高的成功率,并且所造成的创伤更少。

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