泛面外伤治疗过程中插管技术的比较

Aravindh Rj
{"title":"泛面外伤治疗过程中插管技术的比较","authors":"Aravindh Rj","doi":"10.37191/mapsci-jdr-1(1)-009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To find the best method of intubation in patients sustaining pan-facial trauma by comparing the pros and cons of each technique. \n\nMaterials and methods: Three different types of intubation techniques (nasotracheal intubation, orotracheal intubation, and sub-mental intubation) were considered in this study. The study population involves 9 patients who have undergone treatment for pan-facial trauma under general anesthesia (3 patients per technique) and the variables of clinical outcome of each group were recorded.\n\nResults: Nasal intubation is the most common and safest method of intubation. However, it can’t be used in some types of pan-facial trauma. In cases like these, oral intubation is not preferred. As it severely compromises maxillofacial repair because of interference with the placement of intermaxillary fixation [3](IMF), which is used to establish the patient s occlusion in the intraoperative period. Submental intubation is an alternative with minimal risk to tracheostomy when orotracheal or nasotracheal intubation is not appropriate. The submental intubation technique gave an uninterrupted surgical field, unobstructed airway, ease of gaining occlusion in general anesthesia, less intraoperative and postoperative complications and it overcomes the disadvantages of both nasotracheal and orotracheal intubation.\n\nConclusion: Preferred techniques of securing an airway are orotracheal, nasotracheal intubation. However these techniques may not always be applicable, thus a trauma surgeon-anesthetist team should always have alternative techniques in their armamentarium which secures the patient's airways without interfering with occlusion, to gain at most postoperative esthetic and functional results.","PeriodicalId":129602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Reports","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison among the Intubation Techniques Employed in the Course of Management of Pan-Facial Trauma\",\"authors\":\"Aravindh Rj\",\"doi\":\"10.37191/mapsci-jdr-1(1)-009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: To find the best method of intubation in patients sustaining pan-facial trauma by comparing the pros and cons of each technique. \\n\\nMaterials and methods: Three different types of intubation techniques (nasotracheal intubation, orotracheal intubation, and sub-mental intubation) were considered in this study. The study population involves 9 patients who have undergone treatment for pan-facial trauma under general anesthesia (3 patients per technique) and the variables of clinical outcome of each group were recorded.\\n\\nResults: Nasal intubation is the most common and safest method of intubation. However, it can’t be used in some types of pan-facial trauma. In cases like these, oral intubation is not preferred. As it severely compromises maxillofacial repair because of interference with the placement of intermaxillary fixation [3](IMF), which is used to establish the patient s occlusion in the intraoperative period. Submental intubation is an alternative with minimal risk to tracheostomy when orotracheal or nasotracheal intubation is not appropriate. The submental intubation technique gave an uninterrupted surgical field, unobstructed airway, ease of gaining occlusion in general anesthesia, less intraoperative and postoperative complications and it overcomes the disadvantages of both nasotracheal and orotracheal intubation.\\n\\nConclusion: Preferred techniques of securing an airway are orotracheal, nasotracheal intubation. However these techniques may not always be applicable, thus a trauma surgeon-anesthetist team should always have alternative techniques in their armamentarium which secures the patient's airways without interfering with occlusion, to gain at most postoperative esthetic and functional results.\",\"PeriodicalId\":129602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Dental Reports\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Dental Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37191/mapsci-jdr-1(1)-009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37191/mapsci-jdr-1(1)-009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:通过对各种方法的优缺点比较,寻找泛面部创伤患者的最佳插管方法。材料和方法:本研究考虑了三种不同类型的插管技术(鼻气管插管、口气管插管和颏下插管)。研究人群为9例接受全麻治疗的泛面部创伤患者(每种技术3例),记录各组临床结局变量。结果:鼻插管是最常用、最安全的插管方法。然而,它不能用于某些类型的泛面部创伤。在这种情况下,不建议使用口腔插管。由于干扰术中用于建立患者咬合的颌间固定物[3](IMF)的放置,严重影响颌面修复。当不适合经气管或鼻气管插管时,颏下插管是一种风险最小的气管切开术选择。颏下插管技术具有手术视野不间断、气道通畅、全麻时易闭塞、术中术后并发症少等优点,克服了鼻气管插管和口气管插管的缺点。结论:固定气道的首选技术是经口气管插管、鼻气管插管。然而,这些技术可能并不总是适用的,因此创伤外科麻醉师团队应该在他们的设备中始终使用替代技术,在不干扰闭塞的情况下保护患者的气道,以获得最多的术后美观和功能效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison among the Intubation Techniques Employed in the Course of Management of Pan-Facial Trauma
Objective: To find the best method of intubation in patients sustaining pan-facial trauma by comparing the pros and cons of each technique. Materials and methods: Three different types of intubation techniques (nasotracheal intubation, orotracheal intubation, and sub-mental intubation) were considered in this study. The study population involves 9 patients who have undergone treatment for pan-facial trauma under general anesthesia (3 patients per technique) and the variables of clinical outcome of each group were recorded. Results: Nasal intubation is the most common and safest method of intubation. However, it can’t be used in some types of pan-facial trauma. In cases like these, oral intubation is not preferred. As it severely compromises maxillofacial repair because of interference with the placement of intermaxillary fixation [3](IMF), which is used to establish the patient s occlusion in the intraoperative period. Submental intubation is an alternative with minimal risk to tracheostomy when orotracheal or nasotracheal intubation is not appropriate. The submental intubation technique gave an uninterrupted surgical field, unobstructed airway, ease of gaining occlusion in general anesthesia, less intraoperative and postoperative complications and it overcomes the disadvantages of both nasotracheal and orotracheal intubation. Conclusion: Preferred techniques of securing an airway are orotracheal, nasotracheal intubation. However these techniques may not always be applicable, thus a trauma surgeon-anesthetist team should always have alternative techniques in their armamentarium which secures the patient's airways without interfering with occlusion, to gain at most postoperative esthetic and functional results.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信