Shikani喉镜与Macintosh喉镜在双腔气管导管插管中的比较

目的：比较Shikani喉镜和Macintosh喉镜在双腔气管导管插管中的有效性和安全性。方法：60例择期行胸外科手术的患者随机分为Shikani喉镜组（S组，n=30）和Macintosh喉镜组（M组，n=30），在全麻诱导后分别采用Shikani喉镜和Macintosh喉镜插入双腔气管导管，记录患者插管时间，插管次数，是否发生导管套囊破裂及口唇、牙齿损伤，患者基础(T0)血压和心率，以及插管开始时(T1)、插管完成后1 min(T2)、插管完成后3 min(T3) 、插管完成后5 min(T4)的血压和心率，评估术后24 h患者有无声音嘶哑及咽喉疼痛。结果：S组患者插管时间少于M组［(37.4±9.7) s vs. (43.9±13.7) s, P=0.039］，两组一次插管成功率差异无统计学意义(87% vs. 80%, P=0.488)；两组均未发生套囊破损；S组发生口唇及牙齿损伤者少于M组（8例vs. 2例，P=0.038）；两组患者之间T0、T1、T2、T3、T4的血压、心率差异无统计学意义(P＜0.05)；两组患者术后24 h咽痛（7例vs. 10例，P=0.390）及声嘶（5例vs. 7例，P=0.519）发生率差异无统计学意义(P＜0.05)。结论：与Macintosh喉镜相比，Shikani喉镜插管花费时间短，口唇及牙齿损伤发生率更小

Comparison of Shikani optical stylet and Macintosh laryngoscope for double-lumen endotracheal tube intubation

Objective:To compare the efficacy and safety of Shikani ( S) optical stylet and Macintosh (M) laryngoscope for double-lumen endotracheal tube intubation .Methods:In the study, 60 patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery were randomly allocated to group S ( n=30 ) and group M ( n=30 ) . After general anesthesia induction , the patients in group S and group M were intubated double-lumen en-dotracheal tube ( DLT) by Shikani optical stylet ( SOS) and macintosh laryngoscope respectively .Intuba-tion time, intubation attempts , cuff broken and oral mucosal or dental injury were recorded;Blood pres-sure and heart rate at baseline ( T0 ) , at the time of intubaiton onset ( T1 ) , 1 minute after intubaiton (T2), 3 minutes after intubation (T3) and 5 minutes after intubation (T3) were also recorded;Hoarse-ness and throat sore of the patients 24 hours after surgery were evaluated .Results:The intubaiton time with the SOS was faster than with the Macintosh (37.4 ±9.7) s vs.(43.9 ±13.7) s, P=0.039] and the first attempt success rate (87%vs.80%, P=0.488) did not differ between the groups; No tube cuff broke in both the groups;Group S had fewer patients who suffered oral mucosal or dental injury than group M (8 vs.2, P=0.038);The blood pressure and heart rate at T0,T1,T2,T3 and T4 did not differ between the groups;Throat sore(7 vs.10, P=0.390) and hoarseness (5 vs.7, P=0.519) incidence did not differ between the groups .Conclusion:By comparison of the Macintosh laryngoscope , the SOS provides faster DLT intubation and causes less oral Mucosal or dental injury .