International journal of obstetric anesthesia · 2005
A prospective observational study of the use of the Proseal laryngeal mask airway for postpartum tubal ligation.
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.
Evans N R, Skowno J J, Bennett P J, James M F, Dyer R A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Though controversial, the risk of pulmonary aspiration during general anaesthesia in the immediate postpartum period appears low. The efficacy of the Proseal laryngeal mask airway was studied prospectively in a group of patients undergoing postpartum tubal ligation.
METHODS: The Proseal laryngeal mask airway was employed for airway management in 90 fasted patients undergoing tubal ligation via minilaparotomy at least 8 h after normal vaginal delivery (mean 36.5, range 8-96 h). Gastric volume and pH were measured, using aspiration through a gastric tube.
RESULT: Proseal laryngeal mask airway insertion was successful in all patients, requiring one attempt in 75 patients (83%). The median (range) leak pressure was 35 (23-40) cmH2O. Twenty-two patients (25%) had a leak pressure of 40 cmH2O or greater. Gastric tube placement was successful in all patients, described as easy in 79 (87%), and difficult in 11 (13%). The mean initial volume of gastric aspirate was 10.7 (0-64) mL and the final volume 15.6 (0-71) mL. The mean pH of the gastric aspirate was 2.6 (1.2-6.6). There were no incidents of suspected fluid regurgitation or aspiration, but two patients required intubation during surgery. Ten patients (11.1%) complained of sore throat in the recovery room, nine of which were described as mild. All patients reported being satisfied with their anaesthesia.
CONCLUSION: The Proseal laryngeal mask airway provides an effective airway for general anaesthesia in fasted patients undergoing tubal ligation from 8 h after normal vaginal delivery. While the safety of an unprotected airway in this population remains uncertain, this study suggested a low risk of regurgitation, especially in the first 24 h post partum.
METHODS: The Proseal laryngeal mask airway was employed for airway management in 90 fasted patients undergoing tubal ligation via minilaparotomy at least 8 h after normal vaginal delivery (mean 36.5, range 8-96 h). Gastric volume and pH were measured, using aspiration through a gastric tube.
RESULT: Proseal laryngeal mask airway insertion was successful in all patients, requiring one attempt in 75 patients (83%). The median (range) leak pressure was 35 (23-40) cmH2O. Twenty-two patients (25%) had a leak pressure of 40 cmH2O or greater. Gastric tube placement was successful in all patients, described as easy in 79 (87%), and difficult in 11 (13%). The mean initial volume of gastric aspirate was 10.7 (0-64) mL and the final volume 15.6 (0-71) mL. The mean pH of the gastric aspirate was 2.6 (1.2-6.6). There were no incidents of suspected fluid regurgitation or aspiration, but two patients required intubation during surgery. Ten patients (11.1%) complained of sore throat in the recovery room, nine of which were described as mild. All patients reported being satisfied with their anaesthesia.
CONCLUSION: The Proseal laryngeal mask airway provides an effective airway for general anaesthesia in fasted patients undergoing tubal ligation from 8 h after normal vaginal delivery. While the safety of an unprotected airway in this population remains uncertain, this study suggested a low risk of regurgitation, especially in the first 24 h post partum.