首页> 外文期刊>Anesthesiology >Nasal ventilation is more effective than combined oral-nasal ventilation during induction of general anesthesia in adult subjects.
【24h】

Nasal ventilation is more effective than combined oral-nasal ventilation during induction of general anesthesia in adult subjects.

机译:在成年人中诱导全身麻醉期间,鼻通气比口服鼻通气更有效。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: The authors hypothesized that nasal mask ventilation may be more effective than combined oral-nasal mask ventilation during induction of general anesthesia. They tested this hypothesis by comparing the volume of carbon dioxide removed per breath with nasal versus combined oral-nasal mask ventilation in nonparalyzed, apneic, adult subjects during induction of general anesthesia. METHODS: Fifteen adult subjects receiving general anesthesia were ventilated first with a combined oral-nasal mask and then with only a nasal mask. The patient's head was maintained in a neutral position, without head extension or lower jaw thrust. Respiratory parameters were recorded simultaneously from both the nasal and oral masks regardless of ventilation approach. RESULTS: The volume of carbon dioxide removed per breath during nasal mask ventilation (median, 5.0 ml; interquartile range, 3.4-8.8 ml) was significantly larger than that during combined oral-nasal mask ventilation (median, 0.0 ml; interquartile range, 0.0-0.4 ml; P = 0.001); even the peak inspiratory airway pressure during nasal ventilation (16.7 +/- 2.7 cm H2O) was lower than that during combined oral-nasal ventilation (24.5 +/- 4.7 cm H2O; P = 0.002). The expiratory tidal volume during nasal ventilation (259.8 +/- 134.2 ml) was also larger than that during combined oral-nasal ventilation (98.9 +/- 103.4 ml; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Nasal mask ventilation was more effective than combined oral-nasal mask ventilation in apneic, nonparalyzed, adult subjects during induction of general anesthesia. The authors suggest that nasal mask ventilation, rather than full facemask ventilation, be considered during induction of anesthesia.
机译:背景:作者假设在全身麻醉诱导期间鼻罩通气可能比口腔鼻罩联合通气更有效。他们通过比较在全身麻醉诱导期间非瘫痪,呼吸暂停,成年受试者的鼻腔呼吸与鼻腔联合面罩通气相比,每次呼吸去除的二氧化碳量来检验这一假设。方法:15名接受全身麻醉的成年受试者首先使用鼻腔联合面罩通气,然后仅鼻腔面罩通气。患者的头部保持在中性位置,没有头部伸展或下颌下压力。无论通气方式如何,都通过鼻罩和口罩同时记录呼吸参数。结果:鼻面罩通气期间每次呼吸排出的二氧化碳量(中值为5.0 ml;四分位间距为3.4-8.8 ml)显着大于口鼻鼻罩联合通气期间的中位数为0.0 ml;四分位间距为0.0 -0.4 ml; P = 0.001);即使鼻通气期间的最高吸气气道压力(16.7 +/- 2.7 cm H2O)也低于鼻腔联合通气的峰值(24.5 +/- 4.7 cm H2O; P = 0.002)。鼻通气期间的呼气潮气量(259.8 +/- 134.2 ml)也大于口鼻通气联合的呼气潮气量(98.9 +/- 103.4 ml; P = 0.003)。结论:在全身麻醉诱导期间,呼吸暂停,非瘫痪的成年受试者,鼻罩通气比口服鼻-鼻罩通气更有效。作者建议在麻醉诱导过程中考虑鼻罩通气,而不是全面罩通气。

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