{"title":"一项随机对照开放标签试验:C-MAC视频喉镜引导与I-Gel®盲置在儿科患者中的临床表现比较","authors":"Rakesh Kumar, Pooja Bihani, Sadik Mohammed, Rashmi Syal, Pradeep Bhatia, Rishabh Jaju","doi":"10.4274/TJAR.2023.221010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Placement of the supraglottic airway devices under direct vision has been shown to decrease the incidence of malposition in adults. This study was designed to compare the clinical performance of C-MAC guided and blind placement of i-gel® in paediatric patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The present prospective, randomized controlled study was conducted on 102 paediatric patients scheduled to undergo elective infraumbilical surgeries under general anaesthesia. Patients were randomly divided into group \"B\" (blind) and group \"C\" (C-MAC) based on the technique used for placement of i-gel®. The primary objective of the study was to compare the incidence of malposition based on the fiberoptic bronchoscope (FOB) score of the glottic view. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (OPLP), hemodynamic parameters, and insertion characteristics (time taken to insert and the number of attempts) were secondary objectives. Categorical data were presented as ratio or percentage and continuous data were presented as mean ± standard deviation or median [95% confidence interval (CI)].</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of malposition (Brimacombe score 1 or 2) was significantly lower in group C compared to group B (7.8% vs 49% respectively) (<i>P</i> < 0.001); implying a relative risk reduction of 2.42 (95% CI 1.72 to 3.40) with C-MAC. On FOB assessment, the median (interquartile range) Brimacombe score was significantly better in group C [4 (4-4)] compared to group B [3 (2-3)] (<i>P</i> < 0.001). The OPLP was significantly higher in group C compared to group B. Other insertion characteristics were comparable in both the study groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared to blind placement, C-MAC guided placement ensures proper alignment of i-gel® with periglottic structures and proper functioning of i-gel®.</p>","PeriodicalId":23353,"journal":{"name":"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation","volume":"51 4","pages":"347-353"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10440480/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Clinical Performance of C-MAC Video Laryngoscope Guided vs Blind Placement of I-Gel® in Paediatric Patients: A Randomized Controlled Open-Label Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Rakesh Kumar, Pooja Bihani, Sadik Mohammed, Rashmi Syal, Pradeep Bhatia, Rishabh Jaju\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/TJAR.2023.221010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Placement of the supraglottic airway devices under direct vision has been shown to decrease the incidence of malposition in adults. This study was designed to compare the clinical performance of C-MAC guided and blind placement of i-gel® in paediatric patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The present prospective, randomized controlled study was conducted on 102 paediatric patients scheduled to undergo elective infraumbilical surgeries under general anaesthesia. Patients were randomly divided into group \\\"B\\\" (blind) and group \\\"C\\\" (C-MAC) based on the technique used for placement of i-gel®. The primary objective of the study was to compare the incidence of malposition based on the fiberoptic bronchoscope (FOB) score of the glottic view. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (OPLP), hemodynamic parameters, and insertion characteristics (time taken to insert and the number of attempts) were secondary objectives. Categorical data were presented as ratio or percentage and continuous data were presented as mean ± standard deviation or median [95% confidence interval (CI)].</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of malposition (Brimacombe score 1 or 2) was significantly lower in group C compared to group B (7.8% vs 49% respectively) (<i>P</i> < 0.001); implying a relative risk reduction of 2.42 (95% CI 1.72 to 3.40) with C-MAC. On FOB assessment, the median (interquartile range) Brimacombe score was significantly better in group C [4 (4-4)] compared to group B [3 (2-3)] (<i>P</i> < 0.001). The OPLP was significantly higher in group C compared to group B. Other insertion characteristics were comparable in both the study groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared to blind placement, C-MAC guided placement ensures proper alignment of i-gel® with periglottic structures and proper functioning of i-gel®.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23353,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation\",\"volume\":\"51 4\",\"pages\":\"347-353\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10440480/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/TJAR.2023.221010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/TJAR.2023.221010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:在直视下放置声门上气道装置已被证明可以减少成人位置错位的发生率。本研究旨在比较C-MAC引导和i-gel®盲置在儿科患者中的临床表现。方法:对102例全麻下择期行脐下手术的患儿进行前瞻性、随机对照研究。根据i-gel®的放置技术,将患者随机分为B组(blind)和C组(C- mac)。本研究的主要目的是比较纤维支气管镜(FOB)声门视图评分的错位发生率。口咽漏压(OPLP)、血流动力学参数和插入特性(插入时间和尝试次数)是次要目标。分类资料以比率或百分比表示,连续资料以均数±标准差或中位数[95%置信区间(CI)]表示。结果:C组的位错发生率(Brimacombe评分1分或2分)明显低于B组(分别为7.8%和49%)(P < 0.001);这意味着C-MAC的相对风险降低了2.42 (95% CI 1.72至3.40)。在FOB评估中,C组[4(4-4)]的Brimacombe评分中位数(四分位间距)明显优于B组[3 (2-3)](P < 0.001)。与b组相比,C组的OPLP明显更高。两个研究组的其他插入特征具有可比性。结论:与盲植入相比,C-MAC引导下的植入可确保i-gel®与幽门周围结构的正确对齐和i-gel®的正常功能。
Comparison of Clinical Performance of C-MAC Video Laryngoscope Guided vs Blind Placement of I-Gel® in Paediatric Patients: A Randomized Controlled Open-Label Trial.
Objective: Placement of the supraglottic airway devices under direct vision has been shown to decrease the incidence of malposition in adults. This study was designed to compare the clinical performance of C-MAC guided and blind placement of i-gel® in paediatric patients.
Methods: The present prospective, randomized controlled study was conducted on 102 paediatric patients scheduled to undergo elective infraumbilical surgeries under general anaesthesia. Patients were randomly divided into group "B" (blind) and group "C" (C-MAC) based on the technique used for placement of i-gel®. The primary objective of the study was to compare the incidence of malposition based on the fiberoptic bronchoscope (FOB) score of the glottic view. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (OPLP), hemodynamic parameters, and insertion characteristics (time taken to insert and the number of attempts) were secondary objectives. Categorical data were presented as ratio or percentage and continuous data were presented as mean ± standard deviation or median [95% confidence interval (CI)].
Results: The incidence of malposition (Brimacombe score 1 or 2) was significantly lower in group C compared to group B (7.8% vs 49% respectively) (P < 0.001); implying a relative risk reduction of 2.42 (95% CI 1.72 to 3.40) with C-MAC. On FOB assessment, the median (interquartile range) Brimacombe score was significantly better in group C [4 (4-4)] compared to group B [3 (2-3)] (P < 0.001). The OPLP was significantly higher in group C compared to group B. Other insertion characteristics were comparable in both the study groups.
Conclusion: Compared to blind placement, C-MAC guided placement ensures proper alignment of i-gel® with periglottic structures and proper functioning of i-gel®.