腹腔镜胆囊手术喉罩全身麻醉3种置入方法比较

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (598 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To compare three different methods of inserting laryngeal mask airways during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods Ninety patients scheduled for selective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were assigned to three groups using random number table method:the standard technique group (Group A),rotational technique group (Group B) and jaw-thrust group (Group C).Each group had 30 patients. The duration of insertion,one-time success rate,ease of placement,post-operative staining of the extractive mask with blood and sore throat 24 hours after operation were recorded and compared between the three different insertion methods. Results In Group C,the one-time success rate was 93%,significantly higher than that of Group A(60%)and Group B(67%),and the difference was of statistical significance(P<0.01).Insertion took much less time in Group C than in Group A(61±8.7) sec and Group B(60±9.3) sec (P<0.01).In Group C(1.2±0.37),the difficulty score of LMA placement was significantly lower than that in Group A (1.8±0.70) and B (1.7±0.66)(P<0.05).In Group C(3%),the surface of LMA stained with blood was smaller than that in Group A (27%) and B (20%)(P<0.01).Incidence of sore throat in Group C(6%) was decreased obviously compared with A Group A(23%) and Group B(16%) (P<0.01). Conclusions The jaw-thrust approach is user-friendly and effective,which can prevent accidental injury and reduce postoperative complications. It should be made more popular in clinical anesthesia.

Key words： laryngeal mask general anesthesia laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Received: 10 June 2017

ZTFLH:

R614.2

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	MA Qigang
	CHEN Zhuo

Cite this article:

MA Qigang,CHEN Zhuo. Comparison of three methods of inserting laryngeal mask airways during laparoscopic cholecystectomy[J]. Med. J. Chin. Peop. Armed Poli. Forc., 2017, 28(11): 1104-1106.

URL:

http://journal08.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_wjyx/EN/ OR http://journal08.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_wjyx/EN/Y2017/V28/I11/1104

[1]	陈献文.食管引流型喉罩在腹腔镜胆囊手术麻醉中的应用分析[J].中外医疗,2012,9(31):26-27.
[2]	Van Zundert A A,Fonck K,AL-Shaikh B, et al .Compairson of the LMA-classic with the new disposable soft seal laryngeal mask in spontaneously breathing adult patients[J].Anesthesiology,2003,99(5):1066-1071.
[3]	Mann V,Spitzner T,Schwandner T, et al .The effect of a cervical collar on the seal pressure of the LMA Supreme:a prospective, crossover trial[J].Anesthesioa,2012,67(11):1260-1265.
[4]	蒋燕,龙勤,雷晓峰,等.Suprem喉罩和气管插管在全身麻醉应用中的对比研究[J].重庆医学,2012,29(41):3061-3063.
[5]	唐爱平,陈金保. 三代喉罩与气管插管在全身麻醉诱导期对循环[J].临床麻醉学杂志,2014,30(1):61-63.
[6]	Ghai B,Ram J,Makkar J K, et al .Fiber-optic assessment of LMA position in children:a randomized crossover comparison of two techniques[J].Paediatr Anaesth,2011,21(11):1142-1147.
[7]	Haghighi M,Mohammadzadeh A,Naderi B, et al .Comparing two methods of LMA insertion; classic versus simplified (airway)[J].Middle East J Anaesthesiol,2010,20(4):509-614.
[8]	Kumar D,Khan M,Ishaq M.Rotational vs standard smooth laryngeal mask airway insertionin adults[J].J Coll Physicians Surg Pak,2012,22(5):275-279.
[9]	魏薇,赵春雷,杨蓉娅.普通喉罩两种置入技术气道并发症的比较[J].中国美容整形外科杂志,2015,8(26):476-478.
[10]	邵瑾,沈文生,潘路平.3种盲探徒手法置入充气喉罩效果比较[J].中国乡村医药杂志,2015,22(7):10-11.
[11]	Kahmke R,Woodard C R.Dysphagia,hoarseness,and globus in a postoperative patient[J].Am J Otolaryngol,2015,36(2):310-311.

[1]	. [J]. Med. J. Chin. Peop. Armed Poli. Forc., 2019, 30(8): 709-710.