Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Study Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, ease of placement, and ventilatory parameters of a new alternate airway device, the EasyTube (EzT; Teleflex Ruesch, Research Triangle Park, NC), in comparison to the endotracheal tube (ETT).
Design: Prospective, randomized controlled trial.
Setting: University Hospital.
Subjects: 200 adult ASA physical status I and II patients scheduled for surgery.
Interventions: Patients were randomized to two groups, one to receive ventilation via the EzT (n = 100) or the ETT (n = 100). After preoxygenation and induction with fentanyl and propofol, patients received muscle relaxation. The respective airway device was then inserted and mechanical ventilation was instituted.
Measurements: Ease of insertion, number of insertion maneuvers, time until airtight seal of the airway was achieved, duration of surgery, leak pressure as well as arterial oxygen saturation (SpO(2)), and end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO(2)) data, were recorded.
Main Results: Mallampati airway class was higher in the EzT group (P < 0.029), while thyromental distance showed no difference between the two groups. Ease of insertion was noted in the EzT group (P < 0.043). Number of insertions was equal in both groups; insertion time was shorter with the EzT (15.5 +/- 3.6 sec vs. 19.3 +/- 4.6 sec; P < 0.0001). Leak pressure and SpO(2) were not significantly different, while ETCO(2) was lower with the ETT (P < 0.024). Adjustments had to be made for two EzT group patients. No difference in frequency of laryngo-pharyngeal discomfort was observed in either group.
Conclusion: Insertion of an EzT appears to reduce time and facilitate placement of an airway device when compared with direct laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2008.09.008 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!