Shikani喉镜与Airtraq喉镜用于颈椎活动受限患者清醒气管插管对比研究

目的 比较Shikani喉镜与Airtraq喉镜清醒气管插管在颈椎手术中的应用效果. 方法 选择ASA分级Ⅰ、Ⅱ级,拟全身麻醉下行前路或后路颈椎内固定术患者60例.按随机数字表法分为Shikani喉镜组(S组)和Airtraq喉镜组(A组),每组30例.记录入室15 min麻醉诱导前(T1)、麻醉诱导后插管前(T2)、插管即刻(T3)、插管后1 min(T4)及插管后3 min(T5)时的MAP、HR、气管插管的成功率、插管时间,评估患者对气管插管的耐受性、配合程度及满意度,观察术后咽喉损伤情况. 结果 与T1比较,A组T3～T5时点MAP升高、HR增快(P＜0.05).A组T3～T5时点MAP高于S组,HR快于S组(P＜0.05).S组插管时间短于A组[(15±4)s比(22±5)s],插管成功率高于A组(100％比90％)(P＜0.05).与A组比较,S组气管插管耐受性及满意度优于A组(P＜0.05),咽喉损伤的发生率也较A组少(P＜0.05). 结论 颈椎手术清醒诱导插管中,与Airtraq喉镜比较,Shikani喉镜可减少气管插管时心血管应激反应,提高插管成功率及患者的舒适度,缩短插管时间,降低咽喉损伤的发生率.     

Truview EVO2喉镜用于模拟颈项强直患者气管插管的效果

目的评价Truview EVO2喉镜用于模拟颈项强直患者气管插管的效果。方法择期经口气管插管全麻手术患者100例,静脉麻醉诱导后使用硬质颈托固定其颈部,所有患者随机先后使用Truview EVO2喉镜和Macintosh喉镜显露喉部,并采用后一种喉镜辅助气管插管。记录Cormack-Lehane(C-L)分级,喉部结构显露时间,气管插管完成时间,一次插管成功率等。结果 Truview EVO2喉镜C-L分级显著优于Macintosh喉镜(P<0.05),喉部结构显露时间短于Macintosh喉镜(P<0.05),插管一次成功率显著高于Macintosh喉镜(P<0.05);但两种喉镜的气管插管完成时间差异无统计学意义。结论 Truview EVO2喉镜用于模拟颈项强直患者气管插管效果明显优于Macintosh喉镜,对于颈部活动受限患者具有很好的应用价值。     

McGrath喉镜和Macintosh喉镜在张口困难患者气管插管中的比较

目的 比较McGrath视频喉镜(5系列)和Macintosh直接喉镜在张口困难患者气管插管中的应用效果.方法 择期手术患者18例,张口度1.5～3 cm,全麻诱导后,先用Macintosh喉镜暴露声门,退出后再用McGrath喉镜暴露声门并气管插管.记录两种喉镜声门暴露情况(Cormack-Lehane分级).结果 Macintosh喉镜CL分级(Ⅰ～Ⅳ级)为2/3/7/3例,McGrath喉镜CL分级为7/8/3/0例(P＜0.05).有3例患者不能置入Macintosh喉镜.结论 对于张口度在1.5～3 cm的患者,采用McGrath喉镜暴露声门明显好于Macintosh喉镜.     

预计困难插管患者使用Airtraq喉镜、Shikani喉镜和Macintosh喉镜行气管插管的比较

目的 探讨Airtraq喉镜、Shikani喉镜和Macintosh喉镜在预计困难插管患者中行气管插管的应用价值.方法 行全麻插管手术预计困难插管患者75例,随机分为Airtraq喉镜组(A组)、Shikani喉镜组(S组)和Macintosh喉镜组(M组),三次内插管成功者入选本研究,每组25例.记录插管时间,麻醉诱导前(T1)、诱导后(T2)、插管结束即刻(T3)和插管后3 min(T4)时的MAP和HR.同时观察各组患者的声门暴露程度以及有无咽喉损伤.结果 A组插管时间最短,其次为S组,M组最慢,A组明显短于S组和M组(P＜0.05).A组插管成功率高于S组和M组(P＜0.05).与T2时比较,T3、T4时M组MAP明显升高、HR明显增快(P＜0.05).T3、T4时M组MAP高于A组,HR快于A组(P＜0.05).A组声门完全显露率最高,其次为S组,M组最低,A组明显优于S组和M组(P＜0.05).A组咽喉损伤发生率低于M组(P＜0.05).结论 在预计困难插管条件下,与Shikani喉镜和Macintosh喉镜比较,使用Airtraq喉镜可以缩短插管时间,提高插管成功率,减少气管插管时心血管应激反应,维持血流动力学稳定,降低咽喉损伤的发生率.     

模拟颈椎活动受限者经口气管插管的探讨

我们对择期手术患者人为限制其颈椎活动，观察其对声门暴露程度的影响，并比较了自制弹性橡胶探条顺行引导与常规方法气管内插管，以探讨探条引导技术处理气管插管困难的价值。资料与方法选择术前预测无气管插管困难、身体状况良好的择期手术患者５０例，年龄３９～６７岁，常规术前用药。入室后静注氟芬合剂２ｍｌ，５分钟后开始模拟观察。声门可见度首先用１％丁卡因行口腔、咽喉及气管内充分表面麻醉，然后将患者头颈充分后仰，肩下垫薄枕（理想体位），行喉镜检查并按Ｃｏｒｍａｃｋ［１］标准行声门可见度评级。１级：至少能看清部分声…     

Truview喉镜气管插管在婴儿应用的安全性和可行性

目的观察Truview喉镜气管插管在婴儿应用的安全性和可行性。方法选择62例ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级患儿,年龄3～12月,拟在经口气管插管全身麻醉下实施择期整形外科手术,随机分为Truview喉镜组(T组)和Macintosh喉镜组(M组),每组31例。记录插管时声门暴露分级、麻醉诱导前、诱导后、气管插管后即刻及气管插管后1、2、3、4和5min的HR和SpO2;记录暴露声门时间、气管插管时间及气管插管的并发症。结果与M组比较,T组喉镜暴露声门程度差异无统计学意义,但暴露声门时间及气管插管时间相对延长(P0.05);两组患儿气管插管时HR均有增快(P0.05),但两组间HR和SpO2差异无统计学意义;插管时及拔管后两组均未见明显并发症。结论 Truview喉镜可以安全地应用于婴儿气管插管,但暴露声门和气管插管耗时相对延长。     

喉镜及气管导管弯曲度对模拟颈椎制动患者气管插管的影响

目的 比较视频喉镜(GlideScope)和传统喉镜(Macintosh)及气管导管前端角度对模拟颈椎制动患者气管插管成功率和血流动力学的影响.方法 选择ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级无颈椎活动异常或困难气道拟择期手术的成人患者80例,无长期服用影响BP、HR药物史.麻醉诱导前配戴颈托模拟颈椎制动.麻醉诱导后,随机均分为四组:G1组(弯曲60°)、G2组(弯曲90°)、M1组(弯曲60°)及M2组(弯曲90°),行气管插管.观察喉镜暴露(C/L)分级、插管难易程度[采用视觉模拟评分(VAS)]、插管时间、插管次数,记录基础值、麻醉诱导中、气管插管即刻、插管后1、3、5 min时BP、HR变化.结果 G1、G2组C/L分级优于M1、M2组(P<0.05),G1、G2组VAS低于M1、M2组,G2组插管时间短于其他三组(P<0.05).四组各时点SBP、DBP、HR差异无统计学意义.结论 使用GlideScope并将气管导管弯曲成90°有助于模拟颈椎制动患者的声门暴露,提高插管成功率.     

Airtraq喉镜和Macintosh直接喉镜在经口气管插管时血流动力学的比较

目的比较Airtraq视频喉镜和Macintosh直接喉镜经口气管插管时心血管反应。方法40例拟择期经口气管插管全麻下手术的患者,按照随机数字表随机分为两组,Airtraq组（A组）和Macintosh喉镜组（M组）,每组20例。观察麻醉诱导前、诱导后、插管即刻、插管后1、3min时的心率（HR）、血压和心率收缩压乘积（ratepressureproduct,RPP）。结果两组声门暴露时间差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）,导管置入时间A组（6±4）S短于M组（10±4）S（P〈0．01）。两组诱导后的HR、血压和RPP值都较诱导前的基础值明显下降（P〈0．05）,插管即刻、插管后1min的心血管指标较诱导后明显增高（P〈0．05）。A组插管后3min心血管指标与诱导后比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）,而M组3min时心血管指标[收缩压（SBP）（106±17）mmHg（1mmHg=0．133kPa）,舒张压（DBP）（65±10）mmHg,平均动脉压（MAP）（78±19）mmHg,HR（92±12）次／分,RPP（9748±2072）]与诱导后[SBP（93±15）mmHg,DBP（54±9）mmHg,MAP（67±10）mmHg,HR（85±12）次／分,RPP（8117±1886）]比较差异仍有统计学意义（R0．05）。A组、M组插管后5min心血管指标与诱导后比较差异均无统计学意义。结论与Macintosh直接喉镜相比,应用Airtraq视频喉镜行经口气管插管可减少插管置入时间,且血流动力学反应较轻。     

视频喉镜在垂体瘤患者气管插管中的应用

目的探讨视频喉镜在垂体瘤患者气管插管中的应用。方法选择择期行全麻垂体瘤手术患者51例,男19例,女32例,年龄18~71岁,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级。随机将患者分为Macintosh喉镜组(M组,n=25)和视频喉镜组(VL组,n=26)。M组患者气管插管时使用Macintosh喉镜暴露声门,VL组患者使用电子视频喉镜暴露声门。测量患者颈部后仰度、张口度、甲颏距、颈围、下颌支长度、改良Mallampati分级及面罩通气难易程度。记录暴露声门时按压环状软骨的比例、Cormack-Lehane分级、二次插管的比例和插管时间。结果VL组按压环状软骨的比例(7.7%vs48.0%)及Cormack-Lehane分级明显低于M组(P0.01),插管时间明显短于M组[(32.4±11.7)s vs(45.8±12.6)s](P0.01)。结论视频喉镜用于垂体瘤患者气管插管,可显著改善声门暴露,提高插管成功率并缩短插管时间。     

McGrath可视喉镜与Macintosh直接喉镜显露颈椎手术患者喉部结构的比较

目的 比较McGrath可视喉镜与Macintosh直接喉镜显露颈椎手术患者喉部结构的效果. 方法 50例颈椎手术患者采用随机数字表法随机分为McGrath组和Macintosh组,每组25例.麻醉诱导后,McGrath组先用Macintosh直接喉镜显露喉部结构并记录Cormack-Lehane分级(C/L分级),不插管,再改用McGrath可视喉镜显露喉部结构并插入气管导管.Macintosh组先用McGrath可视喉镜显露声门,再使用Macintosh直接喉镜显露喉部结构并插管.记录患者一般情况、气道评估指标(甲颏间距、张口度、Mallampati分级、颈部活动度)、喉镜显露C/L分级和插管并发症. 结果 两组间患者一般情况和气道评估指标差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).McGrath可视喉镜的C/L分级(Ⅰ级∶Ⅱ级∶Ⅲ级为34∶14∶2)显著优于Macintosh直接喉镜(Ⅰ级∶Ⅱ级∶Ⅲ级为13∶32∶5,P＜0.01). 结论 McGrath可视喉镜对喉部结构的显露优于Macintosh直接喉镜,提示该可视喉镜有助于颈椎手术患者的气管插管处理.     

A comparison of Truview infant EVO2 laryngoscope with the Miller blade in neonates and infants

Background: The Truview EVO2 laryngoscope is a recently introduced device with a unique blade that provides a wide and magnified laryngeal view at 46° anterior refracted angle. An infant blade of the laryngoscope has recently become available. Aims and objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the Truview infant EVO2 laryngoscope with the Miller straight blade laryngoscope in order to determine whether the Truview EVO2 laryngoscope provided an improved laryngeal view at laryngoscopy and also to assess the time taken for intubation with the two devices. Materials and methods: In this prospective randomized study, 60 neonates and infants of either sex undergoing surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled and divided into two groups: endotracheal intubation using a Truview infant blade (Group I) or with a Miller blade number 0 (Group II). The view of the glottis at laryngoscopy, time to intubation and the number of attempts required for intubation were recorded. Results: The average time for laryngoscopy in Group I was 18.18 s and in Group II was 16.30 s, which though not significant clinically, is statistically significant (P = 0.002). While eight patients (26.6%) had Cormack and Lehane grade 2 view on laryngoscopy in Group II, only two patients (6.6%) had such a view in Group 1 (P = 0.039). The number of attempts at laryngoscopy was comparable in the two groups. Conclusion: In this study, we found that in neonates and infants, the tracheal intubation using Truview infant EVO2 blade took almost as much time as miller blade and provided improved laryngoscopic view as compared to the Miller blade.     

Comparison of the Glidescope(R), the Pentax AWS(R), and the Truview EVO2(R) with the Macintosh laryngoscope in experienced anaesthetists: a manikin study

Background: The Pentax Airwayscope®, the Glidescope®, and the TruviewEVO2® constitute three novel laryngoscopes that facilitatevisualization of the vocal cords without alignment of the oral,pharyngeal, and tracheal axes. We compared these devices withthe Macintosh laryngoscope in a simulated easy and difficultlaryngoscopy. Methods: Thirty-five experienced anaesthetists were allowed up to threeattempts to intubate in each of four laryngoscopy scenariosin a Laerdal® SimMan® manikin. The time required toperform tracheal intubation, the success rate, number of intubationattempts and of optimization manoeuvres, and the severity ofdental compression were recorded. Results: In the simulated easy laryngoscopy scenarios, there was no differencebetween the study devices and the Macintosh in success of trachealintubation. In more difficult tracheal intubation scenarios,the Glidescope® and Pentax AWS®, and to a lesser extentthe Truview EVO2® laryngoscope demonstrated advantages overthe Macintosh laryngoscope including a better view of the glottis,greater success of tracheal intubation, and ease of device use.The Pentax AWS® was more successful in achieving trachealintubation, required less time to successfully perform trachealintubation, caused less dental trauma, and was considered bythe anaesthetists to be easier to use. Conclusions: The Pentax AWS® laryngoscope demonstrated more advantagesover the Macintosh laryngoscope than either the Truview EVO2®or the Glidescope® laryngoscope, when used by experiencedanaesthetists in difficult tracheal intubation scenarios.     

TruviewTM EVO2光学喉镜和Macintosh直接喉镜显露喉部结构的比较

目的比较Truview^TM EVO2光学喉镜与Macintosh直接喉镜在经口气管插管中显露喉部结构的效果，探讨该光学喉镜在全麻气管插管中的应用价值。方法经口气管插管全身麻醉下实施择期手术的ASAI-Ⅱ级成人患者200例。麻醉前记录人选患者一般情况和气道评估指标（Mallampati舌咽结构分级、甲颏间距、张口度）。全麻诱导后随机应用直接喉镜或光学喉镜先后显露喉部结构并记录Cormack-Lehane喉部结构显露分级（C／L分级），用后一种喉镜进行气管插管。观察指标包括术前患者一般情况及气道评估指标；C／L分级；喉部结构显露难易度；口咽部损伤；术后咽痛、声音嘶哑等并发症。结果200例患者中男107例，女93例，年龄52岁±13岁，身高164．8cm±11．3cm，体重64．0kg±11．5kg，甲颏间距6．9cm±1．1cm，张口度3．7cm±0．5cm。两种喉镜C／L分级均与Mallampati舌咽结构分级具有相关性（P〈0．01），即Mallampati分级越高，C／L分级越高。有91例两种喉镜C／L分级相同，其中76例为I级，15例为Ⅱ级；4例喉镜C／L分级优于光学喉镜，余105例则光学喉镜优于直接喉镜；在200例病人中，用直接喉镜C／L分级百分比分别为：I级40．O％、Ⅱ级38．5％、Ⅲ级20．5％、IV级1％；而光学喉镜为：I级78．5％、Ⅱ级21.0％、Ⅲ级0．5％。所有患者未记录到明显口咽部损伤和术后咽痛及声音嘶哑。结论Truview^TM EVO2光学喉镜对喉部结构显露C／L分级明显优于Macintosh直接喉镜，从而提示应用光学喉镜可能有助于困难气道的处理。     

Endotracheal Intubation in Patients with Cervical Spine Immobilization: A Comparison of Macintosh and Airtraq Laryngoscopes

Background: The Airtraq laryngoscope (Prodol Ltd., Vizcaya, Spain) is a novel single-use tracheal intubation device. The authors compared ease of intubation with the Airtraq and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine immobilization in a randomized, controlled clinical trial.

Methods: Forty consenting patients presenting for surgery requiring tracheal intubation were randomly assigned to undergo intubation using a Macintosh (n = 20) or Airtraq (n = 20) laryngoscope. All patients were intubated by one of four anesthesiologists experienced in the use of both laryngoscopes.

Results: No significant differences in demographic or airway variables were observed between the groups. All but one patient, in the Macintosh group, were successfully intubated on the first attempt. The Airtraq reduced the duration of intubation attempts (mean +/- SD: 13.2 +/- 5.5 vs. 20.3 +/- 12.2 s), the need for additional maneuvers, and the intubation difficulty scale score (0.1 +/- 0.5 vs. 2.7 +/- 2.5). Tracheal intubation with the Airtraq caused fewer alterations in blood pressure and heart rate.     

可视喉镜与直接喉镜在双腔支气管插管中的应用

目的观察比较可视喉镜与直接喉镜在双腔支气管插管中的临床效果,探讨两者在双腔支气管插管中的应用价值。方法选择择期需行双腔支气管插管的胸外科手术患者80例,男50例,女30例,年龄18~70岁,ASAⅠ~Ⅲ级,将患者随机分为两组:可视喉镜组和直接喉镜组,每组40例,分别使用可视喉镜和直接喉镜行双腔支气管插管。观察比较两组声门显露(C-L)分级、插管时间、第一次插管成功率、插管反应阳性例数和术后24h咽喉痛发生率;监测患者入室后(T_0)、诱导后插管前1min(T_1)、插管后1min(T_2)、2min(T_3)、3min(T_4)MAP、HR;记录口腔损伤出血情况以及气管壁及隆突损伤情况。结果与可视喉镜组比较,直接喉镜组声门显露C-L分级和第一次插管成功率明显升高,插管时间明显缩短,插管反应阳性发生率和术后24h咽喉痛发生率明显降低(P0.05)。两组口腔损伤出血情况及气管壁及隆突损伤情况差异无统计学意义。T_2、T_3时两组MAP明显低于T_1时,且T_2、T_3时直接喉镜组MAP明显低于可视喉镜组(P0.05)。结论与可视喉镜比较,对无预计困难气道的患者,直接喉镜更适用于双腔支气管插管。     

Comparison of the Bullard and Macintosh Laryngoscopes for Endotracheal Intubation of Patients with a Potential Cervical Spine Injury

Background: In the emergency trauma situation, in-line stabilization (ILS) of the cervical spine is used to reduce head and neck extension during laryngoscopy. The Bullard laryngoscope may result in less cervical spine movement than the Macintosh laryngoscope. The aim of this study was to compare cervical spine extension (measured radiographically) and time to intubation with the Bullard and Macintosh laryngoscopes during a simulated emergency with cervical spine precautions taken.

Methods: Twenty-nine patients requiring general anesthesia and endotracheal intubation were studied. Patients were placed on a rigid board and anesthesia was induced. Laryngoscopy was performed on four occasions: with the Bullard and Macintosh laryngoscope both with and without manual ILS. Cricoid pressure was applied with ILS. To determine cervical spine extension, radiographs were exposed before and during laryngoscopy. Times to intubation and grade view of the larynx were also compared.

Results: Cervical spine extension (occiput-C5) was greatest with the Macintosh laryngoscope (25.9 [degree sign] +/- 2.8 [degree sign]). Extension was reduced when using the Macintosh laryngoscope with ILS (12.9 +/- 2.1 [degree sign]) and the Bullard laryngoscope without stabilization (12.6 +/- 1.8 [degree sign]; P < 0.05). Times to intubation were similar for the Macintosh laryngoscope with ILS (20.3 +/- 12.8 s) and for the Bullard without ILS (25.6 +/- 10.4 s). Manual ILS with the Bullard laryngoscope results in further reduction in cervical spine extension (5.6 +/- 1.5 [degree sign]) but prolongs time to intubation (40.3 +/- 19.5 s; P < 0.05).