Can Laryngeal Mask Airway be the First Choice for Tracheal Stenosis Surgery? A Historical Cohort Study.

IF 1 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital Pub Date : 2024-09-30 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.14744/SEMB.2024.99249
Ozal Adiyeke, Onur Sarban, Ergun Mendes, Taner Abdullah, Ali Kahvecioglu, Aynur Bas, Hasan Akin, Funda Gumus Ozcan
{"title":"Can Laryngeal Mask Airway be the First Choice for Tracheal Stenosis Surgery? A Historical Cohort Study.","authors":"Ozal Adiyeke, Onur Sarban, Ergun Mendes, Taner Abdullah, Ali Kahvecioglu, Aynur Bas, Hasan Akin, Funda Gumus Ozcan","doi":"10.14744/SEMB.2024.99249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the usage of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) and orotracheal intubation (OTI), which are separate airway management methods in tracheal reconstruction surgeries, in terms of perioperative management, mortality, and morbidity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult patients who underwent tracheal reconstruction surgery between June 2020 and June 2022 were included in the study, retrospectively. Patients with lost data or primary tracheal malignancy were excluded. Patients who underwent tracheal reconstruction were divided into two groups: LMA and OTI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of a total of 57 included patients, the OTI and LMA groups had 30 (52.63%) and 27 patients (47.37%), respectively. The rate of intubated transfer to the intensive care unit and the length of stay in the intensive care unit were significantly higher in the OTI group (p=0. 014, p=0. 031) than those of the LMA group; further, in tracheal cultures, reproduction was also significantly higher in the OTI group (23.33%) (p=0. 007). The postoperative mortality rates were similar in both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Since the absence of tension in end-to-end anastomosis of the trachea is vital for successful surgery, the LMA application (which has no tracheal contact) can be considered superior to OTI. In this study, LMA was successfully applied in all patients. Considering that the aim of anesthesia management should be to provide adequate oxygenation and normocarbia with minimally invasive intervention, we suggest airway management using LMA as the first option for tracheal reconstruction surgery because of the advantages described in this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":42218,"journal":{"name":"Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11472192/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/SEMB.2024.99249","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the usage of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) and orotracheal intubation (OTI), which are separate airway management methods in tracheal reconstruction surgeries, in terms of perioperative management, mortality, and morbidity.

Methods: Adult patients who underwent tracheal reconstruction surgery between June 2020 and June 2022 were included in the study, retrospectively. Patients with lost data or primary tracheal malignancy were excluded. Patients who underwent tracheal reconstruction were divided into two groups: LMA and OTI.

Results: Of a total of 57 included patients, the OTI and LMA groups had 30 (52.63%) and 27 patients (47.37%), respectively. The rate of intubated transfer to the intensive care unit and the length of stay in the intensive care unit were significantly higher in the OTI group (p=0. 014, p=0. 031) than those of the LMA group; further, in tracheal cultures, reproduction was also significantly higher in the OTI group (23.33%) (p=0. 007). The postoperative mortality rates were similar in both groups.

Conclusion: Since the absence of tension in end-to-end anastomosis of the trachea is vital for successful surgery, the LMA application (which has no tracheal contact) can be considered superior to OTI. In this study, LMA was successfully applied in all patients. Considering that the aim of anesthesia management should be to provide adequate oxygenation and normocarbia with minimally invasive intervention, we suggest airway management using LMA as the first option for tracheal reconstruction surgery because of the advantages described in this study.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
喉罩通气道能否成为气管狭窄手术的首选?一项历史队列研究。
目的比较喉罩气道(LMA)和气管插管(OTI)这两种气道管理方法在气管重建手术中的围手术期管理、死亡率和发病率:研究以回顾性方式纳入了 2020 年 6 月至 2022 年 6 月期间接受气管重建手术的成人患者。排除数据丢失或原发性气管恶性肿瘤患者。接受气管重建手术的患者分为两组:LMA组和OTI组:结果:在总共 57 名纳入患者中,OTI 组和 LMA 组分别有 30 名(52.63%)和 27 名(47.37%)患者。OTI 组患者插管转入重症监护室的比率和在重症监护室的住院时间明显高于 LMA 组(P=0. 014,P=0. 031);此外,在气管培养中,OTI 组的繁殖率也明显高于 LMA 组(23.33%)(P=0. 007)。两组的术后死亡率相似:结论:由于气管端对端吻合术中无张力是手术成功的关键,因此可以认为 LMA 应用(无气管接触)优于 OTI。在本研究中,所有患者都成功应用了 LMA。考虑到麻醉管理的目的应该是通过微创干预提供充足的氧合和正常气压,我们建议将 LMA 作为气管重建手术的首选气道管理方法,因为本研究中描述的 LMA 具有上述优点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital
Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal Hospital MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
16.70%
发文量
41
期刊最新文献
An Analytical Comparison of Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma Patients Manifested with or without Graves' Disease. Can Galanin Be Used as a Marker of Microvascular Dysfunction in Prehypertensives? Can Laryngeal Mask Airway be the First Choice for Tracheal Stenosis Surgery? A Historical Cohort Study. Coexistence of Thyroglossal Cyst and Thyroid Disease in Adults: Surgical Outcomes From A Single Center. Comparative Analysis of Pain and Duration in Panretinal Photocoagulation: Navilas Laser versus Conventional Laser in Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1