首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
检索        

全麻手术患者LMAS喉罩和SLIPA喉罩气道管理的效果
引用本文:王鹏,曹江北,米卫东,张宏,傅强.全麻手术患者LMAS喉罩和SLIPA喉罩气道管理的效果[J].中华麻醉学杂志,2010,30(7).
作者姓名:王鹏  曹江北  米卫东  张宏  傅强
作者单位:解放军总医院外科临床部麻醉手术中心,北京市,100853
摘    要:目的 比较全麻手术患者LMAS喉罩和SLIPA喉罩气道管理的效果.方法 择期全麻手术患者80例,年龄18~70岁,体重45~80 kg,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,随机分为2组(n=40):LMAS喉罩组(L组)和SLIPA喉罩组(S组).麻醉诱导后置入喉罩,行机械通气.记录MAP和HR、喉罩置入情况、喉罩置入时间、气道密闭压、最高气道压、平均气道压、置入喉罩后返流和误吸的发生情况、拔除喉罩后粘血的发生情况及术毕和术后24 h内咽痛的发生情况.结果 两组MAP和HR差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).两组喉罩全部置入成功,一次置入成功率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).与L组比较,S组喉罩置入时间延长,气道密闭压降低(P<0.05),最高气道压和平均气道压差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).两组均未发生返流和误吸.与L组比较,S组喉罩粘血和术毕咽痛的发生率升高(P<0.05),术后24 h内咽痛的发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 LMAS喉罩和SLIPA喉罩置入简单易行,气道密封效果好,可有效保证通气,不良反应少.LMAS喉罩用于全麻手术患者气道管理的效果更好.

关 键 词:喉面罩  呼吸  人工

Efficacy of laryngeal mask airway Supreme and Streamlined Liner of the Pharynx Airway in patients undergoing general anesthesia
WANG Peng,CAO Jiang-bei,MI Wei-dong,ZHANG Hong,FU Qiang.Efficacy of laryngeal mask airway Supreme and Streamlined Liner of the Pharynx Airway in patients undergoing general anesthesia[J].Chinese Journal of Anesthesilolgy,2010,30(7).
Authors:WANG Peng  CAO Jiang-bei  MI Wei-dong  ZHANG Hong  FU Qiang
Abstract:Objective To compare the efficacy of laryngeal mask airway Supreme (LMAS) and Streamlined Liner of the pharynx Airway (SLIPA) in patients undergoing general anesthesia. Methods Eighty ASA Ⅰ or Ⅱ patients aged 18-70 yr weighing 45-80 kg undergoing general anesthesia were randomly divided into 2 groups ( n = 40 each): group LMAS and group SLIPA. Pharyngeal airway was inserted after induction of anesthesia with fentanyl 3μg/kg and propofol 2.0-2.5 mg/kg. MAP, HR, number of insertion, rate of successful placement at first attempt, placement time, airway sealing pressure, peak and mean airway pressure and side effects were recorded. Results There were no significant differences in MAP, HR and rate of successful placement at first attempt between the two groups. The placement time was significantly longer, the airway sealing pressure lower and the incidence of side effects higher in SLIPA group than in LMAS group. There was no significant difference in the peak and mean airway pressure between the 2 groups. Conclusion Both LMAS and SLIPA can assure good airway sealing and adequate ventilation. The complication is rare. The efficacy of LMAS is better.
Keywords:Laryngeal mask  Respiration  artificial
本文献已被 万方数据 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号