Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2002
Aspiration prevented by the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: a case report.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание 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 Niall R, Llewellyn Richard L, Gardner Susan V, James Michael F M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To describe a case of intraoperative passive regurgitation where the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) successfully protected the airway from the respiratory tract.
CLINICAL FEATURES: A 32-yr-old man was electively scheduled for change of dressings and application of plaster of Paris to both legs. A size 5 PLMA was inserted on the first attempt and the patient allowed to breathe spontaneously. Twenty-five minutes into the procedure brown fluid was noticed in the drainage tube of the mask. There was no change in respiratory pattern nor any evidence of coughing retching or vomiting. Twenty-five millilitres of fluid were suctioned out of the tube which tested positive for acid. The PLMA was left in place and the procedure continued uneventfully. After removal of the mask pH testing showed the dorsum of the mask to have a pH of 7 and the ventrum/bowl of the mask to be dry with a pH of 7. The patient had no respiratory symptoms in the recovery room and the postoperative course was uneventful.
CONCLUSIONS: This case illustrates that passive regurgitation can occur unexpectedly intraoperatively and shows that the PLMA can protect the airway during such an event by allowing the regurgitated fluid to pass up the drainage tube without leaking into the glottis.
CLINICAL FEATURES: A 32-yr-old man was electively scheduled for change of dressings and application of plaster of Paris to both legs. A size 5 PLMA was inserted on the first attempt and the patient allowed to breathe spontaneously. Twenty-five minutes into the procedure brown fluid was noticed in the drainage tube of the mask. There was no change in respiratory pattern nor any evidence of coughing retching or vomiting. Twenty-five millilitres of fluid were suctioned out of the tube which tested positive for acid. The PLMA was left in place and the procedure continued uneventfully. After removal of the mask pH testing showed the dorsum of the mask to have a pH of 7 and the ventrum/bowl of the mask to be dry with a pH of 7. The patient had no respiratory symptoms in the recovery room and the postoperative course was uneventful.
CONCLUSIONS: This case illustrates that passive regurgitation can occur unexpectedly intraoperatively and shows that the PLMA can protect the airway during such an event by allowing the regurgitated fluid to pass up the drainage tube without leaking into the glottis.