Comparación del C-MAC convencional y C-MAC D-blade con laringoscopios directos en simulación de lesión de la columna cervical (estudio en modelo)

Divya Jain, Mandeep Dhankar, Jyotsna Wig, Amit Jain
{"title":"Comparación del C-MAC convencional y C-MAC D-blade con laringoscopios directos en simulación de lesión de la columna cervical (estudio en modelo)","authors":"Divya Jain,&nbsp;Mandeep Dhankar,&nbsp;Jyotsna Wig,&nbsp;Amit Jain","doi":"10.1016/j.bjanes.2013.06.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>CMAC videolaryngoscope has recently been introduced for videoscope guided intubation. The aim of our study was to compare and evaluate the efficacy of the conventional blade and the angulated D blade of the CMAC videolaryngoscope with the direct laryngoscopes in simulated cervical spine injury patients on the airway manikin.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>Following power analysis, 33 resident doctors were enrolled to perform endotracheal intubation using all the 4 different laryngoscopes namely the Macintosh laryngoscope, McCoy laryngoscope, conventional CMAC videolaryngoscope and the D blade of the CMAC videolaryngoscopes on the airway manikin in simulated cervical spine injury. The demographic variables of the resident doctors were recorded. The outcomes measured included vocal cord visualization (Cormack–Lehane grading), time taken to intubate, number of attempts for successful intubation and optimizing maneuvers required.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The use of indirect videolaryngoscopes resulted in better glottic visualization in comparison to the direct laryngoscopes (CL-I) in 20/33 (60.6%) in the Macintosh group, 24/33 (72.7%) in McCoy group, 30/33 in (90.9%) in Vlc group and 32/33 (96.9%) in Vld group. The time taken to intubate averaged to 15.54<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->2.6 in Macintosh group, 18.90<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->4.47 in McCoy group, 20.21<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->7.9 in Vlc group and 27.42<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->9.09 in Vld group. The 1st attempt intubation success rate was 84.8% (Macintosh), 72.7% (McCoy), 90.9% (Vlc) and, 78.7% (Vld).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The overall performance of the conventional CMAC blade proved to be the best when compared with the D-blade CMAC, Macintosh blade and the McCoy blade for intubation in simulated cervical spine patients by anesthesia residents.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100199,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (Edicion en Espanol)","volume":"64 4","pages":"Pages 269-274"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bjanes.2013.06.006","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (Edicion en Espanol)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2255496313001396","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

CMAC videolaryngoscope has recently been introduced for videoscope guided intubation. The aim of our study was to compare and evaluate the efficacy of the conventional blade and the angulated D blade of the CMAC videolaryngoscope with the direct laryngoscopes in simulated cervical spine injury patients on the airway manikin.

Materials and methods

Following power analysis, 33 resident doctors were enrolled to perform endotracheal intubation using all the 4 different laryngoscopes namely the Macintosh laryngoscope, McCoy laryngoscope, conventional CMAC videolaryngoscope and the D blade of the CMAC videolaryngoscopes on the airway manikin in simulated cervical spine injury. The demographic variables of the resident doctors were recorded. The outcomes measured included vocal cord visualization (Cormack–Lehane grading), time taken to intubate, number of attempts for successful intubation and optimizing maneuvers required.

Results

The use of indirect videolaryngoscopes resulted in better glottic visualization in comparison to the direct laryngoscopes (CL-I) in 20/33 (60.6%) in the Macintosh group, 24/33 (72.7%) in McCoy group, 30/33 in (90.9%) in Vlc group and 32/33 (96.9%) in Vld group. The time taken to intubate averaged to 15.54 ± 2.6 in Macintosh group, 18.90 ± 4.47 in McCoy group, 20.21 ± 7.9 in Vlc group and 27.42 ± 9.09 in Vld group. The 1st attempt intubation success rate was 84.8% (Macintosh), 72.7% (McCoy), 90.9% (Vlc) and, 78.7% (Vld).

Conclusions

The overall performance of the conventional CMAC blade proved to be the best when compared with the D-blade CMAC, Macintosh blade and the McCoy blade for intubation in simulated cervical spine patients by anesthesia residents.

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
传统C-MAC和C-MAC D-blade与直接喉镜在颈椎损伤模拟中的比较(模型研究)
cmac视频喉镜最近被引入视频镜引导插管。我们的研究目的是比较和评估CMAC视频喉镜常规刀片和成角D刀片与直接喉镜在模拟颈椎损伤患者气道模型上的疗效。材料与方法采用功率分析方法,选取33名住院医师,分别使用Macintosh喉镜、McCoy喉镜、常规CMAC视频喉镜和CMAC视频喉镜D片4种不同的喉镜对气道假人进行模拟颈椎损伤的气管插管。记录住院医师的人口学变量。测量的结果包括声带可视化(Cormack-Lehane分级),插管时间,成功插管的尝试次数和所需的优化操作。结果Macintosh组20/33(60.6%)、McCoy组24/33(72.7%)、Vlc组30/33(90.9%)、Vld组32/33(96.9%)使用间接视频喉镜的声门显像优于直接喉镜(cl - 1)。Macintosh组插管时间平均为15.54±2.6,McCoy组为18.90±4.47,Vlc组为20.21±7.9,Vld组为27.42±9.09。第一次插管成功率Macintosh组84.8%,McCoy组72.7%,Vlc组90.9%,Vld组78.7%。结论麻醉住院医师对模拟颈椎患者插管时,常规CMAC刀片的综合性能优于d型CMAC刀片、Macintosh刀片和McCoy刀片。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Manejo anestésico para la cirugía de atresia de esófago en un neonato con síndrome de Goldenhar Eficacia analgésica del bloqueo del plano transverso del abdomen ecoguiado-revisión sistemática Comparación de los efectos profilácticos del droperidol y del ondansetrón sobre el prurito provocado por la morfina subaracnoidea Endarterectomía carotídea: revisión de 10 años de práctica de la anestesia general y locorregional en un hospital terciario en Portugal Efecto de la rotación de la cabeza en la presión intraocular en decúbito ventral: estudio aleatorizado
×
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:604180095
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