摘要
目的比较Airtraq可视喉镜和Macintosh喉镜用于双腔支气管插管的临床效果。方法选择需行单肺通气的胸外科手术患者60例,随机均分为两组。A组使用Airtraq可视喉镜而M组使用Macintosh直接喉镜行双腔支气管插管。比较两组插管时间、Cormack/Lehane分级、插管难易度评分(IDS评分)、进入目标支气管的成功率、口腔损伤出血情况(唇、齿、舌及口腔黏膜)。结果 A组MallampatiⅢ级患者的插管时间明显短于M组(P<0.05);Cormack/Lehane分级及IDS评分明显优于M组(P<0.05);IDS评分≥1分患者A组明显少于M组(P<0.05)。结论与Macintosh喉镜相比,MallampatiⅢ级患者使用Airtraq可视喉镜插管速度更快,Airtraq可视喉镜下声门显露更佳,且插管难度更低。
Objective To compare the clinical application of the Airtraq and Macintosh laryngoscopes for placement of double-lumen endobranchial tube （DLT）. Methods Sixty patients scheduled for thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation were randomly allocated to two groups. The patients in group A were intuhated with the Airtraq laryngoscope while the patients in group M were intubated with the traditional Macintosh laryngoscope. The intubation time, Cormack and Lehane glottic view, intubation difficulty scale （IDS）, the number of DLT malposition after intubation and the injuries of lip, dentition or tongue were documented and compared between the two groups. Results The intubation time was shorter in group A than in group M in the patients with Mallampati classificationⅢ （P〈0.05）. Cormack and Lehane glottic view was better in group A than in group M （P〈0.05）. Conclusion The Airtraq laryngoscope can reduce the intubation time in patients with Mallampati classification Ⅲ, and provide better glottic view and lower intubation difficulty comparing to Macintosh laryngoscope.
出处
《临床麻醉学杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2011年第9期870-872,共3页
Journal of Clinical Anesthesiology
基金
上海市医院适宜技术联合开发推广应用项目(SHDC12010222)
关键词
气管插管
喉镜
双腔支气管导管
Intratracheal intubation
Laryngoscope
Double-lumen endobranchial tube
