Anesthesia and analgesia · 2006
An evaluation of the retromolar space for oral tracheal tube placement for maxillofacial surgery in children.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Arora Suman, Rattan Vidya, Bhardwaj Neerja
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The eruption of the first and second permanent molar teeth may influence the size of the retromolar space. In this study we evaluated the adequacy of the retromolar space for retromolar intubation and any effect of eruption of the first and second permanent molar teeth on this space in children.
METHODS: Children 3-15 yr of age, undergoing surgery other than facial surgery were included for evaluation of the retromolar space. After standard oral tracheal intubation, the endotracheal tube was shifted to the retromolar space and the mandible was slowly closed to achieve centric occlusion. At the same time, any increase in airway resistance or decrease in oxygen saturation was noted. In the second part of the study, the feasibility of retromolar intubation in pediatric patients undergoing maxillofacial surgery with intraoperative maxillomandibular fixation was assessed.
RESULTS: There was enough space for endotracheal tube placement in the retromolar region. The eruption of the first and second permanent molar teeth did not affect intubation. It was possible to achieve centric occlusion in 79 of 80 children with the endotracheal tube positioned in the retromolar space. Retromolar intubation was successfully accomplished in six pediatric patients undergoing maxillomandibular fixation and maxillofacial surgery.
CONCLUSION: The retromolar space can be safely used for intubation in children when intraoperative maxillomandibular fixation, and simultaneous access to the nose and oral cavity are needed.
METHODS: Children 3-15 yr of age, undergoing surgery other than facial surgery were included for evaluation of the retromolar space. After standard oral tracheal intubation, the endotracheal tube was shifted to the retromolar space and the mandible was slowly closed to achieve centric occlusion. At the same time, any increase in airway resistance or decrease in oxygen saturation was noted. In the second part of the study, the feasibility of retromolar intubation in pediatric patients undergoing maxillofacial surgery with intraoperative maxillomandibular fixation was assessed.
RESULTS: There was enough space for endotracheal tube placement in the retromolar region. The eruption of the first and second permanent molar teeth did not affect intubation. It was possible to achieve centric occlusion in 79 of 80 children with the endotracheal tube positioned in the retromolar space. Retromolar intubation was successfully accomplished in six pediatric patients undergoing maxillomandibular fixation and maxillofacial surgery.
CONCLUSION: The retromolar space can be safely used for intubation in children when intraoperative maxillomandibular fixation, and simultaneous access to the nose and oral cavity are needed.