不同插管技术在口腔颌面外科困难气道患者中的应用  

Application of different intubation techniques for difficult airway in patients undergoing maxillofacial surgery

作　　者：石立新[1] 张晓彤[1] 

机构地区：[1]首都医科大学附属北京口腔医院麻醉科,北京市100050

出　　处：《江苏医药》2013年第11期1306-1308,共3页Jiangsu Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的比较常见的几种插管技术应用于困难气道患者的效果。方法口腔颌面外科困难气道患者319例分为五组,分别采用经鼻腔盲探气管插管(A组,54例)、逆行引导气管插管(B组,52例)、光棒引导气管插管(C组,60例)技术、视频喉镜气管插管(D组,72例)和纤维支气管镜引导气管插管(E组,81例)。比较插管效果和相关并发症发生情况。结果 D和E组插管成功率明显高于A、B和C组(100.0%和100.0%vs.55.5%、76.9%和80.0%)(P<0.05);与B、C、D和E组比较,A组插管成功率明显低、耗时长、并发症多(P<0.05)。结论临床医生应综合分析困难气道的特点和类型,选择适当的插管方法,减少插管相关并发症。Objective To compare the outcomes of intubation by different intubation techniques in the patients with difficult airway. Methods A total of 319 patients with difficult airway undergoing oral and maxillofacial surgery was intubated with traditional blind intubation technique（group A, 54 cases）, retrograde intubation technique （group B, 52 eases）, lightwand-guided tracheal intuhation technique（group C, 60 cases）, video endotracheal intubation technique （group D, 72 cases）, or fiberoptic laryngoscope intubation technique （group E, 81 cases）. The the outcomes of intubation were evaluated and compared. Results The successful rates of intubation were higher in groups of D and E than those in groups of A, B and C（100% and 100% vs. 55.5%, 76. 9% and 80. 0%）（P〈0. 05）. Compared to groups of B, C, D and E, the successful rate of intubation was lower, the time of intubation was longer and the intubation-related complications were more in group A（P〈0. 05）. Conclusion To reduce the intubation-related complications, selection of intubation techniques shoud be made on the basis of sufficient analysis of individual condition in difficult airway.

关 键 词：困难气道 气管插管 口腔颌面外科手术 

分 类 号：R614[医药卫生—麻醉学]