【摘要】：目的:對(duì)比Block Buster導(dǎo)管、鋼絲加強(qiáng)導(dǎo)管和PVC導(dǎo)管在可視軟鏡引導(dǎo)下經(jīng)鼻氣管插管的難易程度與并發(fā)癥。研究對(duì)象與方法:擇期手術(shù)全身麻醉下需要?dú)夤懿骞艿幕颊?50例,年齡18~65歲,ASA分級(jí)Ⅰ~III級(jí);排除困難氣道,口、鼻腔手術(shù),排除鼻衄、上氣道異�；蛴薪�(jīng)鼻氣管插管史的患者。將所有患者隨機(jī)分為3組:Block Buster導(dǎo)管組(BB組),鋼絲加強(qiáng)導(dǎo)管組(WR組)和PVC導(dǎo)管組(PVC組)。常規(guī)誘導(dǎo)后在可視軟鏡引導(dǎo)下經(jīng)鼻氣管插管,觀察記錄插管時(shí)間、成功率、置入導(dǎo)管的阻力與調(diào)整方法、出血情況、術(shù)后并發(fā)癥及相應(yīng)處理等情況。實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果:三組患者的人口統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)資料、插管條件均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異。在經(jīng)鼻氣管插管過(guò)程中,WR、BB、PVC三組患者插管成功率(分別是92%、92%、86%)和術(shù)后并發(fā)癥無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異。其中在導(dǎo)管穿過(guò)鼻腔時(shí),BB組和WR組比PVC組用時(shí)短;在套囊染血和損傷總分上,Block Buster導(dǎo)管和鋼絲加強(qiáng)導(dǎo)管均優(yōu)于PVC導(dǎo)管;在分泌物染血情況上,Block Buster導(dǎo)管優(yōu)于PVC導(dǎo)管;在困難插管患者中,Block Buster導(dǎo)管插管難度優(yōu)于PVC導(dǎo)管,其余數(shù)據(jù)均無(wú)差異。結(jié)論:對(duì)于非困難氣道患者,在可視軟鏡引導(dǎo)下經(jīng)鼻氣管插管的過(guò)程中,Block Buster導(dǎo)管比PVC導(dǎo)管插管損傷更小,插管難度更低,與鋼絲加強(qiáng)導(dǎo)管插管性能相似,是臨床可用的一種經(jīng)鼻氣管導(dǎo)管。
[Abstract]:Objective: to compare the difficulty and complications of Block Buster catheter, wire reinforced catheter and PVC catheter under the guidance of soft endoscope. Subjects and methods: 150 patients with tracheal intubation under elective general anesthesia, aged 18 to 65 years, were enrolled in this study. The ASA grade was 鈪，

本文編號(hào)：2377432