Malekshoar Mehrdad, Adibi Pourya, Jarineshin Hashem, Tavassoli Ehsan, Kalani Navid, Zarei Tayyebeh, Sayadinia Mehrdad, Vatankhah Majid
Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Management Research Center, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandar Abbas, Iran.
Bull Emerg Trauma. 2024;12(3):111-116. doi: 10.30476/beat.2024.102372.1509.
The present study compared respiratory parameters between the two methods of airway establishment, ETT and LMA, for patients scheduled for orthopedic surgery with general anesthesia.
This randomized double-blinded clinical trial was conducted on patients scheduled for elective orthopedic surgery under general anesthesia, in Bandar Abbas, Iran, from January 2021 to December 2021. Using a random allocation table, the study participants were randomly divided into two groups, to employ either ETT (n=48) or LMA insertion (n=48). The study's ultimate goal was to assess the respiratory parameters in 1, 3, 5, 10, and 15 minutes following intubation.
At all-time points, the average of peak airway pressure (P peak) and P plateau parameters in the ETT group was much higher than the EMA group (<0.001 in all comparisons). The value of dynamic lung compliance in the LMA group was significantly higher than the ETT group in all considered time periods (<0.001 in all comparisons). The upward trend in the value of this index was significant only in the LMA group (=0.030). There were no significant differences in arterial oxygen saturation and end-tidal carbon dioxide levels between the two groups (>0.05).
In terms of arterial oxygen saturation stability and at the same time providing respiratory dynamic compliance, the LMA device outperformed the ETT.
本研究比较了全身麻醉下接受骨科手术患者的两种气道建立方法(气管内插管[ETT]和喉罩气道[LMA])的呼吸参数。
本随机双盲临床试验于2021年1月至2021年12月在伊朗阿巴斯港对计划接受全身麻醉下择期骨科手术的患者进行。使用随机分配表,将研究参与者随机分为两组,分别采用ETT(n = 48)或插入LMA(n = 48)。该研究的最终目标是评估插管后1、3、5、10和15分钟时的呼吸参数。
在所有时间点,ETT组的气道峰压(P峰)和平台压参数平均值均远高于LMA组(所有比较中P < 0.001)。在所有考虑的时间段内,LMA组的动态肺顺应性值均显著高于ETT组(所有比较中P < 0.001)。该指标值的上升趋势仅在LMA组显著(P = 0.030)。两组之间的动脉血氧饱和度和呼气末二氧化碳水平无显著差异(P > 0.05)。
在动脉血氧饱和度稳定性方面,同时在提供呼吸动态顺应性方面,LMA装置优于ETT。