首页
期刊简介
编 委 会
期刊订阅
百年学会 医星璀璨
名院风范
学科风华
菁英风采
投稿须知
过刊浏览
联系我们
篇名
关键词
作者
作者单位
摘要
关键词
注册本刊作者
作者投稿查稿
专家远程审稿
编辑在线审稿
编务办公专区
主编办公专区
下载文档
《上海医学》审稿费代缴委托书
《上海医学》杂志2024年征订启事
《上海医学》期刊编审系统审稿专家使用手册
工作动态
03-05
《上海医学》杂志2024年度“春蕾杯”论文评比征文通知
06-14
创新驱动,培育人才—《上海医学》2021年度春蕾计划评审结果揭晓
01-21
《上海医学》期刊影响力指标和学科排名取得显著提升
01-20
《上海医学》恭祝大家新年快乐!
08-18
作废声明
联系方式
发行周期:
月刊
主管单位:
上海市卫生健康委员会
主办单位:
上海市医学会
编辑出版:
《上海医学》编辑部
联系地址:
上海市北京西路1623号
邮编:
200040
电话:
021-62178606
传真:
021-62178606
邮箱:
smasmj@shsma.org.cn
ISSN:
ISSN0253-9934
CN:
CN31-1366/R
收款账号:
1001255309008900719
账户名:
上海市医学会
开户行:
工商银行上海市静安寺支行
友情链接
上海市医学会
当前位置:首页 >
I-gel喉罩、SLIPA喉罩与标准喉罩在全麻下肢手术中应用比较
Comparison of I-gel, SLIPA and standard laryngeal mask applied in general anesthesia for lower limb surgery
浏览(628) 下载(0)
DOI:
作者:
丰浩荣
FENG Haorong
作者单位:
浙江湖州解放军第98医院麻醉科 徐州医学院江苏省麻醉学重点实验室
Department of Anesthesiology, PLA 98th hospital, HuZhou, ZheJiang, 313000 2. XuZhou Medical College JiangSu province anaesthesiology Key Labaratory, XuZhou, JiangSu
关键词:
喉罩 全身麻醉 呼吸 外科手术
Laryngeal mask general anesthesia breathing surgery
摘要:
目的:比较I-gel 喉罩、SLIPA喉罩与标准喉罩用于全麻下肢手术中对患者血流动力学、气道阻力及不良反应等的影响。方法:择期全麻下行骨科下肢手术患者150例,随机分为SLIPA喉罩组(S组)、I-gel 喉罩组(I组)和标准型喉罩组(L组),每组50例。观察喉罩置入前后血流动力学变化,喉罩置入时情况,喉罩置入后PIP、Pflat和PetCO2变化,观察各组气道密封压及喉罩拔除后不良反应。结果:三组病人喉罩置入及拔除时生命体征基本平稳;插入喉罩后、拔喉罩前PIP、Pflat和PetCO2均无显著性差异;S组置入时间最短,L组最长,但I组与S组相比无显著性差异; 三组间气道密封压无差异;S组、L组术后并发症显著高于I组。结论:SLIPA、I-gel喉罩较LMA喉罩更易置入、术后副作用更少。
Objective: To compare the I-gel LMA, SLIPA and standard laryngeal mask(LMA) anesthesia for lower extremity surgery on hemodynamics, airway resistance and the impact of adverse reactions. Method: 150 patients for elective lower limb orthopedic surgery under general anesthesia were randomly divided into SLIPA LMA group (group S), I-gel LMA group ( group I) and standard laryngeal mask group (group L) . Hemodynamic changes were observed before and after LMA insertion, the LMA inserting conditions and PIP, Pflat and PetCO2 changes were observed after LMA insertion , airway inclosure pressure and adverse reactions were recorded after the LMA removal in each group . Results: The three groups of patients’ vital signs were stable when LMA insertion and removed ; There were no significant difference in PIP, Pflat and PetCO2 after the laryngeal mask insertion or before pulling ; It cost the shortest time for LMA insertint in group S, while group L was the longest, but there was no significant difference for the time cost between the group I and group S; The airway inclosure pressure in the three groups showed no difference; The complications in group S , group L were higher than group I significantly. Conclusion: Compared with standard LMA, SLIPA and I-gel LMA inserted easier, with fewer postoperative side effects.
点击下载DOC全文