Anaesthesia
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Tracheal intubation in morbidly obese patients: a comparison of the Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway™ and Laryngeal Mask Airway CTrach™.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway™ (ILMA) and Laryngeal Mask Airway CTrach™ (LMA CTrach) in facilitating tracheal intubation in morbidly obese patients. Eighty patients (body mass index >40 kg x m(-2)) were randomly allocated to the ILMA or the LMA CTrach. ⋯ During the postoperative period, there was more sore throat with the LMA CTrach (p<0.02). We conclude that the ILMA results in shorter intubation times with fewer manoeuvres and sore throat compared with the LMA CTrach in the morbidly obese.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Easy and difficult nasal intubation--a randomised comparison of Macintosh vs Airtraq® laryngoscopes.
A new Airtraq(®) laryngoscope has been developed for nasal intubation. We prospectively compared tracheal intubation efficiency of the Airtraq for nasotracheal intubation vs that of the Macintosh laryngoscope in 200 patients. Depending on pre-operative airway evaluation, the patients were allocated to expected easy (n = 100) or difficult (n = 100) intubation groups, on the basis of mouth opening ≤ 2.5 cm, modified Mallampati score of 4, history of difficult intubation, obvious tumour or swelling. ⋯ All easy intubations were successfully performed with the respective technique. In the expected difficult intubation group, the success rate was higher (47/50 vs 33/50; p < 0.01), the glottis view was better (Cormack and Lehane 1/2/3/4 grades: 29/17/1/3 vs 5/11/18/16, p < 0.01), mean (SD) intubation time was shorter (45(46) s vs 77(47)s, p < 0.01) and the number of optimising manoeuvres was reduced with the nasotracheal Airtraq compared with the Macintosh, respectively. For difficult nasal intubations, the nasotracheal Airtraq is more effective than the Macintosh laryngoscope.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
A randomised trial comparing the laryngeal mask airway Supreme™ with the laryngeal mask airway Unique™ in children.
We conducted a randomised controlled trial comparing the laryngeal mask airway Supreme(™) with the laryngeal mask airway Unique(™) in children. Fifty children presenting for elective surgery were randomly assigned to receive either the laryngeal mask airway Supreme or laryngeal mask airway Unique. The outcomes measured were airway leak pressure, ease and time for insertion, insertion success rate, fibreoptic examination, incidence of gastric insufflation, ease of gastric tube placement through the laryngeal mask airway Supreme, quality of airway during anaesthetic maintenance and complications. ⋯ Median (IQR [range]) airway leak pressures for the laryngeal mask airway Supreme and laryngeal mask airway Unique were 20 [16-21 (12-22)] cmH(2)O and 15 [14-18 (10-24)] cmH(2)O, respectively (p = 0.001). The incidence of gastric insufflation was lower with the laryngeal mask airway Supreme (zero vs six patients), p = 0.01. In conclusion, the laryngeal mask airway Supreme performed as well as the laryngeal mask airway Unique and is a useful alternative for airway maintenance, particularly in children who require evacuation of gastric contents during anaesthesia.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Limited maximal flow rate of target-controlled remifentanil infusion and induced cough.
This study evaluated the effect of limiting maximal infusion-pump flow rate on suppression of remifentanil-induced cough during target-controlled infusion. Two hundred and ten patients were randomly assigned to receive remifentanil at an effect-site concentration of 4.0 ng.ml(-1) with maximal flow rate limited to 100 (group R(100)), 200 (group R(200)), or 1200 ml.h(-1) (group R(1200)). The number of episodes of cough were recorded and graded as mild (1-2), moderate (3-4), or severe (5 or more). ⋯ Patients in group R(100) and R(200) had a significantly lower incidence of cough than those in group R(1200) (p < 0.05). Zero, two and five patients coughed a moderate amount in groups R(100), R(200) and group R(1200), respectively (p < 0.05). Limiting maximal infusion rate during remifentanil TCI suppressed remifentanil-induced cough.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
The influence of patient position on withdrawal force of thoracic epidural catheters.
We investigated the forces required to remove thoracic epidural catheters to determine the effect of patient position on removal. Eighty-four patients undergoing open thoracotomy and thoracic patient-controlled epidural analgesia were enrolled. Catheterisation was performed under fluoroscopic guidance before surgery, and the patients were allocated to one of three position groups for removal: prone; sitting; and lateral. ⋯ No differences in mean (SD) forces were found between groups: prone 1.61 (0.39) N, supine 1.62 (0.61) N and lateral 1.36 (0.56) N (p = 0.140). The withdrawal forces required to remove thoracic epidural catheters were not affected by the position. Thus, the position for removal can be determined by patient's choice and clinical judgement.