视频喉镜与普通喉镜用于鼾症患者经鼻气管插管的比较

目的比较视频喉镜与普通喉镜用于鼾症患者经鼻气管插管的临床效果。方法 ASA I或Ⅱ级的鼾症患者50例,Malamptti分类法为Ⅱ或Ⅲ级,随机均分为视频喉镜组（Glide Scope喉镜,G组）和普通喉镜（Macintosh喉镜,M组）。静注咪唑安定0.05 mg/kg、丙泊酚2 mg/kg、芬太尼3μg/kg、维库溴铵0.1mg/kg行麻醉诱导,2 min后行经鼻气管插管。记录两组患者经鼻气管插管成功所需的时间、插管时C/L分级、患者术前、麻醉诱导时、气管插管即刻、气管插管后1 min、插管后3 min、插管后5 min的SBp、DBp及HR。结果 G组C/L分级低于M组,插管时间短于M组;两组间SBp、DBp与HR无显著性差异。结论视频喉镜组用于鼾症患者经鼻气管插管较普通喉镜组暴露更佳,插管时间更短。

Comparisons of nasotracheal intubation with video laryngoscope and common laryngoscope in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of nasotracheal intubation with Glidescope （G） and Macintosh direct laryngoscope （M） in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome （OSAS）, Methods Fifty OSAS patients （ASA class I or Ⅱ, Malamptti class Ⅱ or Ⅲ） were randomly divided into two groups, G group and M group. Nasotracheal intubation surgery was done after anesthesia induction （dose of anaesthetic： Midazolam 0.05mg/kg, propofol 2mg/kg, fentanyl -g/kg, vecuronium bromide 0. lmg/kg）. The laryngeal view was estimated by Cormack - Lehane classification and the intubation time was assessed by a blinded observer. Noninvasive blood pressure （BP） and heart rate （HR） were recorded at the time points including preoperative, during anesthesia induction, perioperative, postoperative （ 1 rain. 3min and 5min）. Results The C/L grade was significantly better in group G than in group M. Intubation time was less in group G compared with group M. There was no significant difference in hemodynamic response to intubation between the two groups. Conclusions Nasotracheal intubation with Glidescope can provide better view and need less time for intubation in patients with OSAS.