纤维支气管镜引导双腔气管导管插管和可视双腔气管导管插管的对比研究

目的比较纤维支气管镜引导普通双腔气管导管插管和可视双腔气管导管插管用于开胸手术单肺通气麻醉的临床效果。方法选择需行开胸手术的患者60例,随机均分为两组。分别使用纤维支气管镜引导普通双腔气管导管插管和可视双腔气管导管插管。比较两组双腔气管导管定位时间及观察插管应激的血流动力学反应。结果可视双腔气管导管插管组气管导管定位时间比纤维支气管镜引导普通双腔气管导管插管组短,定位及术中管理便捷;可视双腔气管导管插管组插管引起的血流动力学反应与纤维支气管镜引导普通双腔气管导管插管组也没有差异。结论可视双腔气管导管定位时间短,定位准确,易于术中管理。但是仅有左侧双腔一种类型,应用范围存在一定局限性。

Comparison of the intubating of doublelumen endobronchial tube assisted with fiberobronchoscope and the intubating of double-lumen endobronchial tube with an integrated camera(VivaSight-DLTM)

Abstract: Objective?To compare the intubating of doublelumen endobronchial tube assisted with fiberobronchoscope and the intubating of double-lumen endobronchial tube with an integrated camera (VivaSight-DLTM).?Methods?60 patients scheduled for thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation were randomly divided into two groups. The patients in group VivaSight-DLTM were intubated with the VivaSight-DLTM while the other patients in group conventional double-lumen tube were intubated with the conventional double-lumen tube assisted with fiberobronchoscope. The tube position time, was documented and compared between the two groups.?Results?In comparison to conventional double-lumen tube group, the position time was shorter in VivaSight double-lumen group [(90 ± 42) s vs (156 ± 57) s]. Compared with the baseline value in either own group, the HR and SBP after incubation showed no significant difference in both groups.?Conclusion?The double-lumen endobronchial tube with an integrated camera can reduce the tube position time, facilitate the accurate location and intraoperative management.