Macintosh、Glidescope和Airtraq喉镜气管插管成功率的比较

Q4 Medicine
Tuna Ertürk, Hasan Ömür Özkan, G. İnangil, Fuat Gürbüz, S. Özkan
{"title":"Macintosh、Glidescope和Airtraq喉镜气管插管成功率的比较","authors":"Tuna Ertürk, Hasan Ömür Özkan, G. İnangil, Fuat Gürbüz, S. Özkan","doi":"10.5222/jarss.2021.05025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Successful airway management is the primary and most crucial step required for patient safety in anesthetic application. Due to the increase in the variety of materials used for ventilation and intubation in recent years, successful airway management has become more advantageous in difficult airway management. The development of Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes are used as alternative laryngoscopy devices. The aim of the present prospective randomized study is to compare superiority of the success of endotracheal intubation performed with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes in terms of Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of attempts, and use of facilitating maneuvers required for intubation. Methods: Totally 180 patients over 18 years of age, in ASA I-II physiological risk group, who would undergo elective surgery were included in the study. The patients were randomly divided into three groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of intubation attempts, facilitating maneuvers required for intubation, and complications related to intubation were recorded and compared in patients who were intubated with Macintosh laryngoscope in Group-A, Glidescope laryngoscope in Group-B, and Airtraq laryngoscope in Group-C. Results: It was found that demographic data were similar between groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic score, intubation duration, number of attempts and use of facilitating maneuver parameters of the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups were similar and superior to the Macintosh group. In terms of intubation success rates and complications related to intubation, the frequency of the Macintosh laryngoscope group was similar to the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups. Conclusion: According to the result of the study, it was concluded that Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes provide a better view of glotis and ease intubation compared to Macintosh laryngoscope. However, we did not find any difference in intubation success and complication rates between the groups.","PeriodicalId":36000,"journal":{"name":"Anestezi Dergisi","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Endotracheal Intubation Successes with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq Laryngoscopes\",\"authors\":\"Tuna Ertürk, Hasan Ömür Özkan, G. İnangil, Fuat Gürbüz, S. Özkan\",\"doi\":\"10.5222/jarss.2021.05025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Successful airway management is the primary and most crucial step required for patient safety in anesthetic application. Due to the increase in the variety of materials used for ventilation and intubation in recent years, successful airway management has become more advantageous in difficult airway management. The development of Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes are used as alternative laryngoscopy devices. The aim of the present prospective randomized study is to compare superiority of the success of endotracheal intubation performed with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes in terms of Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of attempts, and use of facilitating maneuvers required for intubation. Methods: Totally 180 patients over 18 years of age, in ASA I-II physiological risk group, who would undergo elective surgery were included in the study. The patients were randomly divided into three groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of intubation attempts, facilitating maneuvers required for intubation, and complications related to intubation were recorded and compared in patients who were intubated with Macintosh laryngoscope in Group-A, Glidescope laryngoscope in Group-B, and Airtraq laryngoscope in Group-C. Results: It was found that demographic data were similar between groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic score, intubation duration, number of attempts and use of facilitating maneuver parameters of the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups were similar and superior to the Macintosh group. In terms of intubation success rates and complications related to intubation, the frequency of the Macintosh laryngoscope group was similar to the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups. Conclusion: According to the result of the study, it was concluded that Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes provide a better view of glotis and ease intubation compared to Macintosh laryngoscope. However, we did not find any difference in intubation success and complication rates between the groups.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anestezi Dergisi\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anestezi Dergisi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5222/jarss.2021.05025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anestezi Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5222/jarss.2021.05025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:成功的气道管理是麻醉应用中患者安全的首要和最关键的一步。近年来,由于通气和插管所用的材料越来越多,成功的气道管理在困难的气道管理中变得更加有利。Glidescope和Airtraq喉镜的发展被用作替代喉镜检查设备。本前瞻性随机研究的目的是比较Macintosh、Glidescope和Airtraq喉镜在Cormack-Lehane喉镜分类、插管时间、尝试次数和插管所需便利操作的使用方面的优势。方法:选取180例年龄在18岁以上ASA I-II型生理危险组的择期手术患者作为研究对象。患者随机分为三组。记录a组采用Macintosh喉镜、b组采用Glidescope喉镜、c组采用Airtraq喉镜插管患者的Cormack-Lehane喉镜分类、插管时间、插管次数、插管所需的辅助操作及插管相关并发症。结果:组间人口统计数据相似。Glidescope和Airtraq喉镜组的Cormack-Lehane喉镜评分、插管时间、插管次数和便利操作参数的使用与Macintosh组相似且优于Macintosh组。在插管成功率和插管相关并发症方面,Macintosh喉镜组的频率与Glidescope和Airtraq喉镜组相似。结论:与Macintosh喉镜相比,Glidescope喉镜和Airtraq喉镜能更好地观察声门,便于插管。然而,我们没有发现两组间插管成功率和并发症发生率有任何差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Endotracheal Intubation Successes with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq Laryngoscopes
Objective: Successful airway management is the primary and most crucial step required for patient safety in anesthetic application. Due to the increase in the variety of materials used for ventilation and intubation in recent years, successful airway management has become more advantageous in difficult airway management. The development of Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes are used as alternative laryngoscopy devices. The aim of the present prospective randomized study is to compare superiority of the success of endotracheal intubation performed with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes in terms of Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of attempts, and use of facilitating maneuvers required for intubation. Methods: Totally 180 patients over 18 years of age, in ASA I-II physiological risk group, who would undergo elective surgery were included in the study. The patients were randomly divided into three groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of intubation attempts, facilitating maneuvers required for intubation, and complications related to intubation were recorded and compared in patients who were intubated with Macintosh laryngoscope in Group-A, Glidescope laryngoscope in Group-B, and Airtraq laryngoscope in Group-C. Results: It was found that demographic data were similar between groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic score, intubation duration, number of attempts and use of facilitating maneuver parameters of the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups were similar and superior to the Macintosh group. In terms of intubation success rates and complications related to intubation, the frequency of the Macintosh laryngoscope group was similar to the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups. Conclusion: According to the result of the study, it was concluded that Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes provide a better view of glotis and ease intubation compared to Macintosh laryngoscope. However, we did not find any difference in intubation success and complication rates between the groups.
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
Anestezi Dergisi
Anestezi Dergisi Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
×
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