摘要
对比两种方法在颈椎制动患者全麻气管插管时的应用。选取2013年1月至2013年12月择期不稳定型颈椎损伤需行手术的患者60例,随机分为两组,每组各30例,分别使用可视内窥镜和插管型喉罩于全麻诱导后行气管插管。记录两组的患者完成插管的时间、一次插管成功率、总成功率、插管前后患者心率、血压和脉搏血氧饱和度的变化。结果两组在插管前后患者心率、血压和脉搏血氧饱和度的变化没有差异,可视内窥镜组完成时间(30±8)秒、一次成功率93.3%,优于插管型喉罩组的(55±10)秒和73.3%。在需制动的颈椎损伤患者全麻气管插管方面,可视内窥镜优于插管型喉罩。
This article compares two kinds of methods in the application of cervical spine injury patients with tracheal intuhation during general anesthesia. 60 patients with the unstale cervical spine injury requring surgery were selected in our hospital between January 2013 and December 2013 and these cases were randomly divided into two groups, with 30 cases in each group. For each case in the two groups visual endoscopy and laryngeal mask were respectively used in the induction of general anesthesia. The time of completing intuhation were recorded, as well as the first success rate of intubation, total success rate of intubation, the exchange of heart rate, blood pressure and pulse oxygen saturation he{ore and after intubation were recorded. The heart rate,blood pressure and pulse oxygen saturation before, during and after intubation of the two groups showed no difference. The completion time of intubation (30s±8s) and the first success rate (93.3%) in visual endoscopy group are better than that of intubation larygeal mask group (55s ± 10s, 73. 3M). Discopo visual endoscopy is superior to laryngeal mask intubation in the cervical spine injury patients during anesthesia endotracheal intuhation.
出处
《医学与哲学(B)》
2014年第6期36-37,81,共3页
Medicine & Philosophy(B)
关键词
可视内窥镜
插管型喉罩
气管插管
discopo, intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA), tracheal intubation