British journal of anaesthesia · 2013
Double-lumen tube tracheal intubation using a rigid video-stylet: a randomized controlled comparison with the Macintosh laryngoscope.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yang M, Kim J A, Ahn H J, Choi J W, Kim D K, Cho E A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Despite an increasing need, there is limited experience of double-lumen endobronchial tube (DLT) placement using video laryngoscope. We evaluated DLT intubation using an OptiScope, a rigid video-stylet with a malleable tip derived from the Clarus Video System, in comparison with a Macintosh laryngoscope.
METHODS: After airway evaluation and anaesthetic induction, Cormack and Lehane (C and L) grade was initially assessed in all patients using a Macintosh laryngoscope before tracheal intubation. The trachea was then intubated using either a Macintosh laryngoscope (n=200) or an OptiScope® (n=200). Success rate, intubation time, number of attempts at intubation, vocal cord view during intubation, need for external manipulation, and the incidences of oral mucosal or dental injury were compared between the two devices.
RESULTS: Data were analysed for 397 patients. Intubation time with the OptiScope® was faster [median (inter-quartile range): 15 (12-19) s] than with the Macintosh [18(12-28) s] {mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI)}: 5.5 (3.8-13.2) s, P=0.010]. The success rate of the first intubation was higher with the OptiScope® than with the Macintosh [80.4% vs 89.9%, odds ratio (95% CI): 2.2 (1.22-3.87), P=0.036]. Initial view of the vocal cords was also better, although the final success rate was not different between devices. The need for external laryngeal manipulation, oral mucosal, or dental injury was lower with the OptiScope® compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope (all P<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: The OptiScope® provides faster tracheal intubation and a higher success rate for the first intubation with less trauma and a better vocal cord view than the Macintosh laryngoscope.
METHODS: After airway evaluation and anaesthetic induction, Cormack and Lehane (C and L) grade was initially assessed in all patients using a Macintosh laryngoscope before tracheal intubation. The trachea was then intubated using either a Macintosh laryngoscope (n=200) or an OptiScope® (n=200). Success rate, intubation time, number of attempts at intubation, vocal cord view during intubation, need for external manipulation, and the incidences of oral mucosal or dental injury were compared between the two devices.
RESULTS: Data were analysed for 397 patients. Intubation time with the OptiScope® was faster [median (inter-quartile range): 15 (12-19) s] than with the Macintosh [18(12-28) s] {mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI)}: 5.5 (3.8-13.2) s, P=0.010]. The success rate of the first intubation was higher with the OptiScope® than with the Macintosh [80.4% vs 89.9%, odds ratio (95% CI): 2.2 (1.22-3.87), P=0.036]. Initial view of the vocal cords was also better, although the final success rate was not different between devices. The need for external laryngeal manipulation, oral mucosal, or dental injury was lower with the OptiScope® compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope (all P<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: The OptiScope® provides faster tracheal intubation and a higher success rate for the first intubation with less trauma and a better vocal cord view than the Macintosh laryngoscope.