Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 1997
A tube in the pharynx for emergency ventilation.
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.
Bund M, Walz R, Lobbes W, Seitz W
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: If the endotracheal placement of a nasal advanced tube fails, ventilation via this tube could bridge the time until a fibreoptic bronchoscope is available. This study investigates the efficiency of ventilation via a tube resting with its tip in the pharynx near the glottis.
METHODS: In 20 patients respiratory data during ventilation via a pharyngeally placed tube were recorded by means of pulse oximetry, capnometry and side-stream spirometry. Results were compared with those measured previously in the same patients during conventional facemask ventilation.
RESULTS: Oxygen saturation and end-tidal carbon dioxide concentration remained unchanged using ventilation via facemask (SO2 98.5 +/- 0.9%, FECO2 4.5 +/- 0.7 vol%) or pharyngeal tube (SO2 98.6 +/- 0.7%, FECO2 4.8 +/- 0.4 vol%). No significant differences were found between the two groups with regard to peak airway pressure, tidal volume leakage, compliance and resistance of the respiratory system.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest an effective ventilation and oxygenation via a tube placed with its tip in the pharynx. This technique may be helpful during difficult and prolonged nasal intubation.
METHODS: In 20 patients respiratory data during ventilation via a pharyngeally placed tube were recorded by means of pulse oximetry, capnometry and side-stream spirometry. Results were compared with those measured previously in the same patients during conventional facemask ventilation.
RESULTS: Oxygen saturation and end-tidal carbon dioxide concentration remained unchanged using ventilation via facemask (SO2 98.5 +/- 0.9%, FECO2 4.5 +/- 0.7 vol%) or pharyngeal tube (SO2 98.6 +/- 0.7%, FECO2 4.8 +/- 0.4 vol%). No significant differences were found between the two groups with regard to peak airway pressure, tidal volume leakage, compliance and resistance of the respiratory system.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest an effective ventilation and oxygenation via a tube placed with its tip in the pharynx. This technique may be helpful during difficult and prolonged nasal intubation.