Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2020
Comparison of the Parker flex tip and the unoflex reinforced endotracheal tube for orotracheal fibreoptic intubation in simulated difficult intubation patients.
СтатьяРандомизированное 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.
Narhari Rupesh, Nazaruddin Wan Hassan Wan Mohd, Mohamad Zaini Rhendra Hardy, Che Omar Sanihah, Abdullah Nik Mohamad Nik, Seevaunnamtum Praveena
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The choice of endotracheal tube (ETT) is important for successful orotracheal fibreoptic intubation (OFI). The aim of this study was to compare the use of the Parker flex tip (PFT) with the unoflex reinforced (UFR) ETT during OFI.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 58 patients who underwent elective surgery under general anaesthesia were randomised to two ETT groups, the PFT group (n = 29) and the UFR group (n = 29), for OFI in simulated difficult intubation patients using a rigid cervical collar. After successful standardised induction and relaxation, OFI and railroading of selected ETT were subsequently performed by a similarly experienced practitioner. Ease of insertion, degree of manipulation, time to successful intubation, post-intubation complications and haemodynamic changes were recorded for both groups.
RESULTS: he percentage of easy intubation was comparable between both groups with a slightly higher percentage in the UFR group than the PFT group (69.0% vs. 62.0%; P = 0.599). Degree of manipulation was also comparable between the two groups; the percentage of cases in which manipulation was not required was slightly higher in the UFR group than the PFT group (69.0% vs. 62.1%; P = 0.849). Time to successful intubation was also comparable between the groups, although the time was slightly shorter for the UFR group than the PFT group (56.9 s ± 39.7 s vs. 63.9 s ± 36.9 s; P = 0.488). There were also no significant differences in other parameters.
CONCLUSIONS: The Parker flex tip ETT was comparable to the unoflex reinforced ETT for OFI in simulated difficult airway patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 58 patients who underwent elective surgery under general anaesthesia were randomised to two ETT groups, the PFT group (n = 29) and the UFR group (n = 29), for OFI in simulated difficult intubation patients using a rigid cervical collar. After successful standardised induction and relaxation, OFI and railroading of selected ETT were subsequently performed by a similarly experienced practitioner. Ease of insertion, degree of manipulation, time to successful intubation, post-intubation complications and haemodynamic changes were recorded for both groups.
RESULTS: he percentage of easy intubation was comparable between both groups with a slightly higher percentage in the UFR group than the PFT group (69.0% vs. 62.0%; P = 0.599). Degree of manipulation was also comparable between the two groups; the percentage of cases in which manipulation was not required was slightly higher in the UFR group than the PFT group (69.0% vs. 62.1%; P = 0.849). Time to successful intubation was also comparable between the groups, although the time was slightly shorter for the UFR group than the PFT group (56.9 s ± 39.7 s vs. 63.9 s ± 36.9 s; P = 0.488). There were also no significant differences in other parameters.
CONCLUSIONS: The Parker flex tip ETT was comparable to the unoflex reinforced ETT for OFI in simulated difficult airway patients.