Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Indian J Anaesth ; 66(5): 350-357, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35782669

ABSTRACT

Background and Aims: Video laryngoscopy highly improves the success rate for endotracheal intubation. However, commercially available video laryngoscopes such as McGrath MAC® can be costly. An economical video laryngoscope was assembled by attaching a fibreoptic videoscope into a Macintosh laryngoscope. This randomised study aimed to compare the intubation time of this self-assembled modified Macintosh video laryngoscope (SAM-VL) and McGrath MAC® (McGrath). Methods: This study enroled 62 adults scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia with endotracheal intubation. The primary outcome was total intubation time. Secondary outcomes were the time for glottic visualisation (time A), time for tube insertion after glottic visualisation (time B), first-attempt intubation success rate, degree of glottic visualisation, and need for backward, upward, rightward pressure (BURP) assistance, complications, and user satisfaction. The tests used were: Kolmogorov-Smirnov and the Mann-Whitney test to analyse the data's distribution and the primary outcome, respectively. Results: The median total intubation time in the SAM-VL group versus the McGrath was 63 s (27-114s) versus 74 s (40-133s), respectively (P = 0.032). Intubation time B was significantly faster, while the score of glottic visualisation and BURP assistance was significantly higher in the SAM-VL group. The differences in the rate of successful first attempts and complications were not statistically significant. SAM-VL users rated the ease of blade insertion and manoeuvrability, degree of glottic visualisation, and overall rating as very high. Conclusion: Endotracheal intubation using self-assembled modified video laryngoscope is faster and allows better glottis visualisation than McGrath MAC®.

2.
Anesth Pain Med ; 6(4): e39314, 2016 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27843785

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The patient's position during spinal anesthesia administration plays a major role in the success of spinal needle insertion into the subarachnoid space. The traditional sitting position (TSP) is the standard position for spinal anesthesia administration, but the success rate for spinal anesthesia administration in the TSP is still quite low. The crossed-leg sitting position (CLSP) is one of the alternative positions for the administration of spinal anesthesia, which can increase the degree of lumbar flexion. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare successful spinal needle placement to patients in the CLSP and patients in the TSP prior to undergoing urology surgery. METHODS: This study was a non-blinded, randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing spinal anesthesia for urologic procedures from March-October, 2015 in the central national hospital Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo, Indonesia. After obtaining approval from the FMUI - RSCM (Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia - Rumah Sakit Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo) Ethical Committee and informed consent from patients, 211 subjects were allocated into two groups: the CLSP group (n = 105) and the TSP group (n = 106). The proportion of successful spinal needle placement to the subarachnoid space, ease of landmark palpation, and the number of needle-bone contacts in both groups were then assessed and analyzed. RESULTS: The rate of first-time successful spinal needle insertion was not significantly different between the CLSP and TSP groups (62.9% versus 55.7%, P > 0.05). Ease of landmark palpation in the CLSP group was not significantly different from that in the TSP group (86.7% versus 76.4%, P > 0.05). The number of needle-bone contacts in both groups were not significantly different (P > 0.05). The complication rates were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of successful spinal needle placement in the CLSP group was not significantly different from that in the TSP group in patients undergoing urology surgery. The CLSP can be used as an alternative sitting position for administration of spinal anesthesia.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...