对在全身麻醉下接受择期手术的患者使用自加压 Air-Q® 和 Proseal™ LMA® 的比较评估:随机临床试验

Savita Rana, L. Anand, Manpreet Singh, Dheeraj Kapoor, Deepika Gupta, Harpreet Kaur
{"title":"对在全身麻醉下接受择期手术的患者使用自加压 Air-Q® 和 Proseal™ LMA® 的比较评估:随机临床试验","authors":"Savita Rana, L. Anand, Manpreet Singh, Dheeraj Kapoor, Deepika Gupta, Harpreet Kaur","doi":"10.4103/joacp.joacp_248_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Intra-cuff pressure of Air-Q self-pressurized laryngeal airways (Air-Q SP) balances airway pressure and adapts to patient’s pharyngeal and periglottic structures, thus improves oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP).This study was performed to compare efficacy of Air-Q SP with Proseal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) in patients undergoing elective surgery.\n \n \n \n The study design was prospective, randomized and controlled. Ninety patients were randomly assigned to Air-Q SP or PLMA group. All patients were premedicated and shifted to operation theatre. Monitoring was instituted. After securing IV-line, induction with inj. Morphine + Propofol, relaxation with inj. Vecuronium was done. Supraglottic was inserted according to group allocation. Outcome measures were OLP, fibreoptic view of larynx, success rate, device insertion parameters, haemodynamic and respiratory parameters and post-operative laryngopharyngeal complications. Neostigmine + glycopyrrolate were given, device was extubated.\n \n \n \n All supraglottic airway devices (SADs) were successfully placed in two attempts. The mean initial OLP, OLP at 10 minutes, and device insertion time were significantly lower in Air-Q SP group. Fiber-optic laryngeal view grading was significantly better with Air-Q SP. No significant difference was observed with respect to rate of successful insertion in first attempt, ease of insertion, and manipulations required. The hemodynamic/respiratory parameters and post-operative sore throat in the two both groups were similar.\n \n \n \n Proseal LMA has a higher OLP than Air-Q SP but average insertion time was better, and fiber-optic grading of laryngeal view was shorter with Air-Q SP. However, Air-Q SP and Proseal LMA were both effective for lung ventilation.\n","PeriodicalId":508221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology","volume":"14 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of self-pressurized Air-Q® and Proseal™ LMA® in patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia: A randomized clinical trial\",\"authors\":\"Savita Rana, L. Anand, Manpreet Singh, Dheeraj Kapoor, Deepika Gupta, Harpreet Kaur\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/joacp.joacp_248_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n Intra-cuff pressure of Air-Q self-pressurized laryngeal airways (Air-Q SP) balances airway pressure and adapts to patient’s pharyngeal and periglottic structures, thus improves oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP).This study was performed to compare efficacy of Air-Q SP with Proseal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) in patients undergoing elective surgery.\\n \\n \\n \\n The study design was prospective, randomized and controlled. Ninety patients were randomly assigned to Air-Q SP or PLMA group. All patients were premedicated and shifted to operation theatre. Monitoring was instituted. After securing IV-line, induction with inj. Morphine + Propofol, relaxation with inj. Vecuronium was done. Supraglottic was inserted according to group allocation. Outcome measures were OLP, fibreoptic view of larynx, success rate, device insertion parameters, haemodynamic and respiratory parameters and post-operative laryngopharyngeal complications. Neostigmine + glycopyrrolate were given, device was extubated.\\n \\n \\n \\n All supraglottic airway devices (SADs) were successfully placed in two attempts. The mean initial OLP, OLP at 10 minutes, and device insertion time were significantly lower in Air-Q SP group. Fiber-optic laryngeal view grading was significantly better with Air-Q SP. No significant difference was observed with respect to rate of successful insertion in first attempt, ease of insertion, and manipulations required. The hemodynamic/respiratory parameters and post-operative sore throat in the two both groups were similar.\\n \\n \\n \\n Proseal LMA has a higher OLP than Air-Q SP but average insertion time was better, and fiber-optic grading of laryngeal view was shorter with Air-Q SP. However, Air-Q SP and Proseal LMA were both effective for lung ventilation.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":508221,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\"14 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_248_22\",\"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 Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_248_22","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

Air-Q 自加压喉气道(Air-Q SP)的充气罩囊内压力可平衡气道压力并适应患者的咽部和会厌结构,从而改善口咽漏压(OLP)。 该研究采用前瞻性、随机对照的设计。90 名患者被随机分配到 Air-Q SP 或 PLMA 组。所有患者均接受预处理并转入手术室。进行监护。确保静脉输液后,使用吗啡+异丙酚诱导。吗啡+异丙酚诱导,使用维库溴铵放松。维库溴铵放松。根据组别分配插入声门锁。结果测量指标包括:OLP、喉部纤维光透视、成功率、装置插入参数、血流动力学和呼吸参数以及术后喉咽部并发症。给予新斯的明+甘草酸苷,拔除装置。 所有声门上气道装置(SAD)均在两次尝试后成功置入。Air-Q SP组的初始OLP、10分钟后的OLP和装置插入时间均显著低于Air-Q SP组。Air-Q SP 组的光纤喉视图分级明显更好。在首次插入成功率、插入难易度和所需操作方面,未观察到明显差异。两组患者的血液动力学/呼吸参数和术后咽喉疼痛情况相似。 Proseal LMA 的 OLP 比 Air-Q SP 高,但平均插入时间更长,Air-Q SP 的光纤喉视图分级更短。不过,Air-Q SP 和 Proseal LMA 对肺通气均有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative evaluation of self-pressurized Air-Q® and Proseal™ LMA® in patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia: A randomized clinical trial
Intra-cuff pressure of Air-Q self-pressurized laryngeal airways (Air-Q SP) balances airway pressure and adapts to patient’s pharyngeal and periglottic structures, thus improves oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP).This study was performed to compare efficacy of Air-Q SP with Proseal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) in patients undergoing elective surgery. The study design was prospective, randomized and controlled. Ninety patients were randomly assigned to Air-Q SP or PLMA group. All patients were premedicated and shifted to operation theatre. Monitoring was instituted. After securing IV-line, induction with inj. Morphine + Propofol, relaxation with inj. Vecuronium was done. Supraglottic was inserted according to group allocation. Outcome measures were OLP, fibreoptic view of larynx, success rate, device insertion parameters, haemodynamic and respiratory parameters and post-operative laryngopharyngeal complications. Neostigmine + glycopyrrolate were given, device was extubated. All supraglottic airway devices (SADs) were successfully placed in two attempts. The mean initial OLP, OLP at 10 minutes, and device insertion time were significantly lower in Air-Q SP group. Fiber-optic laryngeal view grading was significantly better with Air-Q SP. No significant difference was observed with respect to rate of successful insertion in first attempt, ease of insertion, and manipulations required. The hemodynamic/respiratory parameters and post-operative sore throat in the two both groups were similar. Proseal LMA has a higher OLP than Air-Q SP but average insertion time was better, and fiber-optic grading of laryngeal view was shorter with Air-Q SP. However, Air-Q SP and Proseal LMA were both effective for lung ventilation.
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