妇科手术患者Guardian喉罩与Supreme喉罩气道管理效果的比较

目的 比较Guardian喉罩与Supreme喉罩用于妇科手术患者气道管理的效果.方法 择期全麻下行妇科手术患者120例,年龄19～80岁,体重50～70kg,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,随机分为2组:Supreme喉罩组(S组,n=59)和Guardian喉罩组(G组,n=61).麻醉诱导后置入4号喉罩,行机械通气.术中监测BP、HR、SpO2、PETCO2和Ppeak.记录喉罩置人情况、置入时间、纤维支气管镜检查分级、气道密封压、正常通气时(VT 8 ml/kg)的气道压、大潮气量(VT20 ml/kg)通气试验时的气道压和漏气的发生情况、术中口咽部漏气的发生情况、拔除喉罩时不良反应和术后咽喉部不良反应的发生情况、麻醉时间、手术时间、喉罩拔除时间和苏醒时间.结果 两组喉罩置入成功率、置入时间、正常通气时的气道压、大潮气量通气试验时的气道压、拔除喉罩时罩体带血和术后咽喉疼痛、声音嘶哑和吞咽困难的发生率、麻醉时间、手术时间、喉罩拔除时间和苏醒时间差异无统计学意义(P＜0.05).两组患者BP、HR、SpO2、Ppeak和PETCO2均在正常范围内.与S组比较,G组纤维支气管镜检查分级和气道密封压升高,大潮气量通气试验时漏气和术中口咽部漏气的发生率降低(P＜0.01).结论 Guardian喉罩和Supreme喉罩置入简单易行,气道密封效果好,可有效保证通气,对咽喉部的刺激小.Guardian喉罩用于妇科手术患者气道管理的效果更好.

Efficacy of laryngeal mask airway Guardian and laryngeal mask airway Supreme in patients undergoing gynecological surgery

Objective To compare the efficacy of laryngeal mask airway Guardian (GLMA) and laryngeal mask airway Supreme (SLMA) in patients undergoing gynecological surgery. Methods One hundred and twenty ASA Ⅰ or Ⅱ patients aged 19-80 yr weighing 50-70 kg undergoing gynecological surgery were randomly divided into 2 groups: SLMA group (group S, n = 59) and GLMA group (group G, n =61). LMA was inserted after induction of anesthesia with propofol 2.0-2.5 mg/kg, sufentanil 0.2 μg/kg and rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg. All the patients were mechanically ventilated. BP, HR, SpO2, PETCO2 and Ppeak were monitored during operation. The rate of successful placement, placement time, fiberoptic bronchoscope grade, airway sealing pressure, airway pressure during normal ventilation with tidal volume of 8 ml/kg, airway pressure and air leakage during ventilation with large tidal volume of 20 ml/kg, air leakage during opertion, complications, anesthesia time, duration of surgery, extubation time and emergence time were recorded. Results There was no significant difference in the rate of successful placement, placement time, airway pressure during normal ventilation and during ventilation with large tidal volume, blood stain at LMA removal, incidence of sore throat, choking hoarseness and dysphagia, anesthesia time, duration of surgery, extubation time, and emergence time between the two groups (P ＜ 0.05). The BP,HR, SpO2, Ppeak and PETCO2 were within the normal range during operation in both groups. The fiberoptic bronchoscope grade and airway sealing pressure were significantly higher, and the incidence of air leakage during ventilation with large tidal volume and during operation was significantly lower in group G than in group S (P ＜ 0.01).Conclusion GLMA and SLMA can provide adequate ventilation during operation with fewer complications and can be used effectively for gynecological surgery. The efficacy of GLMA is better.