双管喉罩气囊预充气置入法与传统置入法临床效果比较

Comparison of correct placement of Proseal laryngeal mask with inflated or deflated cuff of proseal laryngeal mask airway

关键词:  充气量  传统方法  一次性双管喉罩

Key words:  Proseal laryngeal mask airway  traditional method  insertion technique of the LMA

摘要:

［目的］比较双管喉罩气囊预充气置入法与传统置入法置入喉罩的临床效果。［方法］选择在全身麻醉下行择期手术患者60例，随机分为A、B两组，每组30例。全身麻醉诱导后置入双管喉罩。喉罩置入前，对A组患者喉罩气囊预充10 mL气体，B组患者喉罩气囊内的气体完全抽空，然后按常规方法将喉罩置入。记录两组患者建立人工通气道所需的时间、一次成功率、喉罩置入前后血流动力学变化情况及其术后与喉罩置入相关并发症。［结果］A组患者建立人工气道时间为（35±6）s，B组患者为（34±4）s。首次成功率A组为92%，B组为78%，差异具有显著性意义（P<0.05）。喉罩置入前后血流动力学变化及围术期并发症两组比较差异无显著性意义。［结论］两种方法均可安全有效地置入双管喉罩，采用气囊预充气置入法较应用传统置入法一次成功率高。

Abstract:

［Objective］To compare the correct placement of Proseal laryngeal mask airway with inflated or deflated cuff of the Proseal laryngeal mask airway.［Methods］Sixty patients were randomly allocated into two groups: group A,the cuff of the Proseal laryngeal mask airway inflated with 10 mL air,and group B,the cuff of the Proseal laryngeal mask airway deflated.The initial correct placement of the Proseal laryngeal mask airway with the first trail of insertion,the changes of vital signs and Proseal laryngeal mask airway related complications were recorded.［Results］The time used for setting up airway was (35±6)s and (34±4)s in the group A and Group B respectively.The rate of correct placement in the first trail was 92% in group A and 78% in group B.There were no significantly differences of the Proseal laryngeal mask airway related complications and the changes vital sighs between the two groups.［Conclusion］The cuff of the Proseal laryngeal mask airway inflated with 10 mL air is more suitable for the correct placement compared with deflated cuff of the Proseal laryngeal mask airway.