International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology · 2021
The use of laryngeal mask airway for tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Webb Nathaniel, Kars Michelle S, Butler Alan L, Malesinska Monika, Smith Lee P
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Patients undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy traditionally receive anesthesia with endotracheal intubation (ETT) for airway management. The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) may be used instead and may be associated with less airway stimulation and shorter operating room times. The purpose of this study was to report on a large cohort of patients undergoing tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy while using the LMA for airway maintenance during anesthesia.
METHODS: Patients undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy between January 6, 2017 and January 6, 2020 with a LMA were reviewed for safety outcomes. We compared two cohorts of patients with LMA and ETT to analyze the effect on operating room times.
RESULTS: Our study identified 1042 patients who met criteria for review. The incidence of cases requiring conversion to ETT (1.2%) and laryngospasm (0.3%) in our cohort is lower than previously suggested by the literature. The patients who underwent surgery with the LMA spent less time in the operating room (p = 0.004) compared to the ETT group.
CONCLUSION: The use of the LMA may be a safe and effective option for airway management during tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. There may be a benefit of OR time reduction in patients undergoing anesthesia with an LMA compared to ETT.
METHODS: Patients undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy between January 6, 2017 and January 6, 2020 with a LMA were reviewed for safety outcomes. We compared two cohorts of patients with LMA and ETT to analyze the effect on operating room times.
RESULTS: Our study identified 1042 patients who met criteria for review. The incidence of cases requiring conversion to ETT (1.2%) and laryngospasm (0.3%) in our cohort is lower than previously suggested by the literature. The patients who underwent surgery with the LMA spent less time in the operating room (p = 0.004) compared to the ETT group.
CONCLUSION: The use of the LMA may be a safe and effective option for airway management during tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. There may be a benefit of OR time reduction in patients undergoing anesthesia with an LMA compared to ETT.