背景:路德维希的心绞痛(LA)是一种危及生命的感染,可影响口腔和颈部的底部,可能导致严重的气道阻塞。在这种情况下,由于口腔地板的肿胀,救援气道管理和氧合可能是具有挑战性的,刺耳,和有限的张嘴。本研究的目的是评估与标准几何视频喉镜(SGVL,Macintosh3,Trachway)用尸体模拟路德维希的心绞痛。
方法:制备3具不同难度的新鲜冰冻尸体,以模拟LA患者的气道状况,包括口腔地板肿胀,限制张口,和刺耳.来自不同专业的55名二年级住院医师参加了这项研究,并接受了使用SGVL进行气道管理的培训,VS,和HAVL-C设备。参与者被随机分配到使用三个设备以随机顺序对尸体进行模拟LA插管。并记录插管次数和成功率.参与者还使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分对插管的难度进行了评估。主要结局评估首过插管成功或失败,而次要结局使用不同喉镜的视觉模拟量表测量插管时间和主观难度。
结果:SGVL90s内插管成功率为40%,VS的82%,HAVL-C为76%VS和HAVL-C的成功率明显高于SGVL,风险比分别为3.4和2.7,95%置信区间(CI)分别为2.0-5.7和1.6-4.6,p<0.001。VS和HAVL-C插管成功的优势比分别为8.1和6.3,与SGVL相比,95%CI为3.7-17.8和2.4-16.7,p<0.001。VAS评分与插管成功率和插管时间显著相关。
结论:在LA病例中,VS和HAVL-C的使用优于SGVL。这些发现表明,使用VS和HAVL-C可以提高LA患者的插管成功率并减少插管时间。
Ludwig\'s angina (LA) is a life-threatening infection that can affect the floor of the mouth and neck, potentially causing serious airway obstruction. In such cases, rescue airway management and oxygenation can be challenging due to swelling of the mouth floor, trismus, and limited mouth opening. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of the Trachway video-stylet (VS) and Pentax AWS hyperangulated videolaryngoscope with channel (HAVL-C) compared to the standard geometric video-laryngoscope (SGVL, Macintosh 3, Trachway) in simulating Ludwig\'s angina with cadavers.
Three fresh frozen cadavers were prepared with varying degrees of difficulty to simulate the airway conditions of patients with LA, including mouth floor swelling, restricted mouth opening, and trismus. Fifty-five second-year resident physicians from various specialties participated in the study and received training in airway management using SGVL, VS, and HAVL-C devices. Participants were randomly assigned to intubate simulated LA with cadavers using the three devices in a random order, and intubation times and success rates were recorded. Participants also rated the difficulty of intubation using a visual analogue scale (VAS) score. The primary outcome assessed the first-pass intubation success or failure, while the secondary outcomes measured the intubation time and subjective difficulty using a visual analogue scale with different laryngoscopes.
The success rates for intubation within 90 s were 40% for SGVL, 82% for VS, and 76% for HAVL-C. VS and HAVL-C had significantly higher success rates than SGVL, with hazard ratios of 3.4 and 2.7, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of 2.0-5.7 and 1.6-4.6, p < 0.001, respectively. The odds ratios of successful intubation for VS and HAVL-C were 8.1 and 6.3, respectively, with a 95% CI of 3.7-17.8 and 2.4-16.7, p < 0.001, compared to SGVL. The VAS score was significantly correlated with intubation success rate and time.
In cases of LA, the use of VS and HAVL-C is preferable over SGVL. These findings suggest that using VS and HAVL-C can improve intubation success rates and reduce intubation time in patients with LA.