蘇中宏+史宏偉+葛亞力
[摘要] 目的 探討小號左側(cè)雙腔氣管導管復合小潮氣量通氣用于胸科手術(shù)麻醉的可行性。 方法 選擇2016年8月~2017年2月南京市第一醫(yī)院需放置左側(cè)雙腔氣管導管行單肺通氣的30例胸科手術(shù)患者作為研究對象,采用隨機數(shù)字表法分為兩組,每組各15例。兩組患者分別應用不同型號的左側(cè)雙腔氣管導管:實驗組(T組)應用小型號,男應用F35號,女應用F32號;對照組(C組),男應用F37號,女應用F35號。比較兩組患者氣管插管時的插管阻力、纖維支氣管鏡檢查所見呼吸道損傷情況、插管次數(shù);比較兩組患者插管成功開始雙肺通氣時、單肺通氣開始時和單肺通氣1 h的呼吸道峰壓與單肺通氣1 h的血氧飽和度(SPO2);記錄氣管插管前平均動脈壓(MAP)的最低值及其對應的心率(HR)、氣管插管后MAP的最高值及其對應的HR,以后者減去前者計算插管所致的MAP和HR增加值并進行比較。 結(jié)果 T組氣管插管時的插管阻力和纖維支氣管鏡檢查呼吸道損傷發(fā)生率均低于C組,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P < 0.05);兩組插管次數(shù)比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P > 0.05)。機械通氣期間,兩組插管成功開始雙肺通氣時、單肺通氣開始時、單肺通氣1 h的呼吸道峰壓和單肺通氣1 h的SPO2比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P > 0.05)。此外,T組氣管插管所致的HR增加值顯著小于C組(P < 0.05),MAP增加值低于C組(P < 0.05)。 結(jié)論 復合小潮氣量機械通氣時,小號左側(cè)雙腔氣管導管能夠滿足術(shù)中單肺通氣的需要,且氣管插管所致的呼吸道損傷更輕、血流動力學更平穩(wěn)。
[關(guān)鍵詞] 麻醉;支氣管內(nèi);胸科手術(shù);呼吸;人工;血流動力學
[中圖分類號] R614 [文獻標識碼] A [文章編號] 1673-7210(2018)01(b)-0119-04
[Abstract] Objective To study the feasibility of small-sized left-sided double-lumen tube for thoracic surgery anesthesia when combined with low tidal volume ventilation. Methods From October 2016 to February 2017, 30 cases of thoracic surgery patients with a single lung ventilation in the left-sided double-lumen tube in Nanjing First Hospital were selected as research objects, and divided into two groups by random number table, with 15 cases in each group. Patients of two groups were treated with different size left-sided double-lumen tubes. The trial group (group T) was applied to the small model, male application F35, female application F32. Control group (group C) was applied to the normal model, male application F37, female application F35. The resistance during intubating, airway trauma testified through fiberoptic bronchoscopy, intubation attempts and hemodynamic changes following intubation were compared between two groups. The airway peak-pressures at the beginning of double-lung ventilation following successful intubation and one-lung ventilation, together with the airway peak-pressure after one-hour′s one-lung ventilation, the oxygen saturation (SPO2) after one-hour′s one-lung ventilation were also compared between two groups. The lowest mean arterial pressure (MAP) and corresponding heart rate (HR) before intubation, the highest MAP and corresponding HR after intubation were recorded. The deviation value between the highest MAP and the lowest MAP, together with the corresponding deviation value of HR, were also compared between group T and group C. Results The resistance during intubating, airway trauma testified through fiberoptic bronchoscopy in group T were lower than those of group C, with statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference between two groups in intubation attempts (P > 0.05). During mechanical ventilation, there was no statistical difference between two groups in the double-lung ventilation following successful intubation, one-lung ventilation together with the airway peak-pressure after one-hour′s one-lung ventilation, SPO2 after one-hour′s one-lung ventilation (P > 0.05). In addition, the increased value of HR caused by intubation was less in group-T than in group C (P > 0.05) and the increased value of MAP was also less in group T than in group C (P > 0.05). Conclusion Small-sized left-sided double-lumen tube can satisfy the need of one-lung ventilation when combined with low tidal volume ventilation, and the respiratory tract injury caused by tracheal intubation was more stable.endprint
[Key words] Anesthesia; Endotracheal; Thoracic surgery; Respiration; Artificial; Hemodynamics
雙腔氣管導管是肺隔離單肺通氣的金標準,尤其適用于需要絕對肺隔離的患者,如大量膿液或血液積聚、支氣管胸膜瘺合并積膿等[1]。但是,其較大的外徑和硬度導致插管難度較大,應激反應較重,術(shù)后吞咽疼痛等不良反應發(fā)生較高[2],甚至發(fā)生呼吸道撕裂[3-5],導管遠端打折也偶有發(fā)生[6-7]。從理論上講,更小的外徑應該有利于避免上述不足。本研究正是基于這樣的假設,研究小號左側(cè)雙腔氣管導管在具有上述優(yōu)點的同時能否滿足單肺通氣的要求。
1 資料與方法
1.1 一般資料
選擇2016年8月~2017年2月南京市第一醫(yī)院(以下簡稱“我院”)需放置左側(cè)雙腔氣管導管行單肺通氣的30例胸科手術(shù)患者作為研究對象,包括食管癌根治術(shù)6例和各種肺部手術(shù)24例。采用隨機數(shù)字表法將所有患者分為兩組,每組各15例。兩組患者分別應用不同型號的左側(cè)雙腔氣管導管,實驗組(T組)應用小型號,男應用F35號,女應用F32號;對照組(C組),男應用F37號,女應用F35號。兩組患者一般資料比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P > 0.05),具有可比性。見表1。本研究獲得我院醫(yī)學倫理委員會批準,所有入選患者均簽署知情同意書。
1.2 儀器設備
實驗所用左側(cè)雙腔氣管導管為廣州維力醫(yī)療器械有限公司生產(chǎn)Well Lead,生產(chǎn)批號:20160602。麻醉呼吸機為Datex-Ohmeda Aisys CS2型,監(jiān)護儀采用飛利浦公司PHILIPS IntelliVue MX600型,纖維支氣管鏡為明視得MDHA10 3.8 mm。
1.3 麻醉及氣管插管方法
術(shù)前60 min肌肉注射0.1 g魯米那鈉、0.3 mg東莨菪堿。入室后,靜脈注射0.02 mg/kg咪達唑侖、2%利多卡因局部麻醉行橈動脈穿刺。面罩給氧3 min(氧流量5 L/min),隨后靜脈注射0.03 mg/kg咪達唑侖、2 mg/kg丙泊酚、0.3 μg/kg舒芬太尼和0.8 mg/kg羅庫溴銨開始麻醉誘導,給藥后4 min,由同一位麻醉醫(yī)師使用UE視頻喉鏡行氣管插管。雙腔氣管導管藍色套囊全部進入聲門時移去管芯,逆時針旋轉(zhuǎn)90°以便導管遠端進入左側(cè)主支氣管。隨后,套囊充氣、聽診器聽診初步定位雙腔氣管導管位置。連接呼吸機開始機械通氣,在纖維支氣管鏡下進行雙腔氣管導管的精確定位。
氣管插管過程中,沒有明顯的插管阻力且經(jīng)調(diào)整仍不能成功定位者,拔出導管準備第二次插管,再次失敗則降低一個型號重新插管。若插管過程有明顯的插管阻力且不能成功定位,則降低一個型號再次插管,呼吸道峰壓和血氧飽和度(SPO2)視為缺失值不再記錄。
1.4 機械通氣方法
呼吸參數(shù)的設置:雙肺通氣潮氣量8 mL/kg、呼吸頻率12次/min;單肺通氣潮氣量6 mL/kg、呼吸頻率14次/min、呼氣末正壓(PEEP)4 cm H2O(1 cmH2O=0.098 kPa)。單肺通氣1 h內(nèi),吸入氧濃度100%。
1.5 監(jiān)測指標
①氣管插管和呼吸道損傷指標:插管過程中有無明顯的插管阻力、插管次數(shù)以及纖維支氣管鏡檢查有無呼吸道損傷(有點片狀黏膜紅腫即視為有損傷)。②機械通氣相關(guān)指標:插管成功開始雙肺通氣時、單肺通氣開始時和單肺通氣1 h的呼吸道峰壓,以及入室時的基礎(chǔ)SPO2、單肺通氣1 h的SPO2。③血流動力學指標采用MAP和HR:記錄3個時間點的數(shù)值,即動脈穿刺成功后的基礎(chǔ)值、誘導后插管前的最低值(HR取值對應于最低血壓值,下同)、首次插管后的最高值,并以首次插管后的最高值減去插管前的最低值計算出相應的MAP和HR的增加值。血流動力學指標通過監(jiān)護儀的趨勢功能獲得,時間間隔12 s。
1.6 統(tǒng)計學方法
采用SPSS 21.0統(tǒng)計學軟件進行數(shù)據(jù)分析,計量資料數(shù)據(jù)用均數(shù)±標準差(x±s)表示,兩組間比較采用t檢驗;計數(shù)資料用率表示,組間比較采用χ2檢驗,以P < 0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計學意義。
2 結(jié)果
2.1 兩組氣管插管及呼吸道損傷情況比較
氣管插管過程中,T組2例(13.3%)有明顯插管阻力,C組10例(66.7%),T組發(fā)生率顯著低于C組,差異有高度統(tǒng)計學意義(P < 0.01);T組2例(13.3%)有輕微呼吸道黏膜損傷的,C組9例(60.0%),T組發(fā)生率顯著低于C組,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P < 0.05);T組所有病例一次成功,C組有4例(26.7%)需要二次插管,其中3例通過降低氣管導管型號獲得成功,兩組二次插管率比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P > 0.05)。
2.2 兩組機械通氣情況比較
兩組機械通氣相關(guān)指標比較,其中T組的基礎(chǔ)SPO2顯著低于C組,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P < 0.05)。兩組在插管成功開始雙肺通氣時、單肺通氣開始時、單肺通氣1 h的呼吸道峰壓和單肺通氣1 h的SPO2比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P > 0.05)。見表2。
2.3 兩組血流動力學變化比較
兩組血流動力學變化比較,T組患者氣管插管所導致的HR增加值顯著低于C組,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P < 0.05);T組的MAP增加值低于C組,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P < 0.05)。見表3。
3 討論
肺隔離單肺通氣技術(shù)是胸部、縱隔、心臟、血管和食管手術(shù)的常用方法,而左側(cè)雙腔氣管導管因其較大的安全性而最常應用。理想的雙腔氣管導管型號是套囊未充氣時有輕微漏氣[8-9]。氣管導管型號過大和重復插管常導致各種損傷和插管困難[4-5,7]。因此,探究合適的雙腔氣管導管型號一直是麻醉醫(yī)師關(guān)注的重點之一。采用術(shù)前評估計算出的雙腔氣管導管型號[10],在臨床實踐中仍有相當比例需要減小雙腔氣管導管型號而獲得成功[11],故而實際意義有限。endprint
臨床實踐中,比較一致和簡單的方法是按照性別和身高來選擇雙腔氣管導管的型號[12-13]。這與Slinger[12]的研究結(jié)果不同,Zani等[13]總結(jié)的型號要小。Ideris[14]等研究發(fā)現(xiàn)亞洲人需要的氣管導管型號更小??梢?,隨著研究的深入,雙腔氣管導管的型號選擇有減小的趨勢。本研究中,T組15例患者全部一次插管成功,而C組15例患者有4例需要二次插管,其中3例通過減小型號獲得成功。通過減小型號成功插管的比例為20%(3/15,)明顯低于Ideris等[14]所報導的50%。這也進一步說明,小號雙腔氣管導管插管更容易。
本研究中,以雙腔氣管導管插管過程中所遇到的插管阻力這個主觀感受作為觀察指標,其客觀上反映了一定程度的插管困難、插管損傷等。從本研究的結(jié)果看,插管過程T組有明顯插管阻力的發(fā)生率和相應的呼吸道損傷發(fā)生率均低于C組(P < 0.05),兩組二次插管率比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P > 0.05);同時,T組插管所致的HR增快作用顯著小于C組。由此可以看出,雙腔氣管導管插管過程中,插管阻力和呼吸道損傷、插管反應等有密切聯(lián)系。
雙腔氣管導管插管單肺通氣往往伴隨較高的呼吸道壓。過高的呼吸道壓可以導致呼吸機相關(guān)急性肺損傷[15]。以小潮氣量通氣為基礎(chǔ)的綜合性肺保護性通氣策略在重癥醫(yī)學領(lǐng)域已經(jīng)得到一致的認可[16]。使用這種通氣策略有許多的優(yōu)點[17-19]。在麻醉領(lǐng)域,以小潮氣量通氣為基礎(chǔ)的肺保護性通氣策略已引起麻醉醫(yī)師的重視[20-21]。
本研究中,雖然雙腔氣管導管的型號減小了,但無論是雙肺通氣還是單肺通氣,呼吸道峰壓卻幾乎沒有任何差異,術(shù)中的SPO2也沒有差異且都在正常范圍。這些提示,在小潮氣量復合PEEP的通氣模式下,小號的雙腔氣管導管可以滿足術(shù)中機械通氣的需要[22]。同時,使用小號雙腔氣管導管,氣管插管損傷和插管反應更小,因而簡單易行,這對沒有配備纖維支氣管鏡的基層單位具有很大的意義,因為后者是雙腔氣管插管推薦的必備工具[23]。
綜上所述,小號的左側(cè)雙腔氣管導管插管所致的呼吸道損傷更輕、血流動力學更平穩(wěn);復合小潮氣量通氣能夠滿足術(shù)中單肺通氣的需要,但有必要進行更廣泛、更深入的研究。
[參考文獻]
[1] Mourisse J,Liesveld J,Verhagen A,et al. Efficiency,efficacy,and safety of EZ-blocker compared with left-sided double-lumen tube for one-lung ventilation [J]. Anesthesiology,2013,118(3):550-561.
[2] EI-Boghdadly K,Bailey CR,Wiles MD. Postoperative sore throat:a systematic review [J]. Anaesthesia,2016,71(6):706-717.
[3] Cools E,Neyrinck AP. Left main-stem bronchus rupture due to a left-sided double lumen tube [J]. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg,2015,66(4):31-33.
[4] 陳峰,劉杰,朱愛飛,等.胸腔鏡下行肺大泡切除致廣泛皮下氣腫一例[J].臨床麻醉學雜志,2014,30(10):972.
[5] 李剛,張建欣.雙腔支氣管導管致支氣管裂傷兩例[J].臨床麻醉學雜志,2014,30(7):723.
[6] Choi DK,Hwang JH,Song MH,et al. Kinking of a left-sided double-lumen tube within the trachea [J]. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth,2011,25(6):1119-1120.
[7] Ambrosio C,Leykin Y,Pellis T,et al. Endotracheal kinking of a double-lumen tube:a potential complication of inappropriate size tube selection [J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol,2011,28(8):607-608.
[8] Brodsky JB,Lemmens HJ. Left double-lumen tubes:clinical experience with 1,170 patients [J]. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth,2003,17(3):289-298.
[9] Bahk JH. Guidelines for determining the appropriateness of double-lumen endobronchial tube size [J]. Anesth Analg,2002,95(2):501.
[10] Brodsky JB,Lemmens HJ. Tracheal width and left double-lumen tube size:a formula to estimate left-bronchial width [J]. J Clin Anesth,2005,17(4):267-270.
[11] Ambrosio C,Leykin Y,Pellis T,et al. Endotracheal kinking of a double-lumen tube:a potential complication of inappropriate size tube selection [J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol,2011,28(8):607-608.endprint
[12] Slinger P. A view of and through double-lumen tubes [J]. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth,2003,17(3):287-288.
[13] Zani G,Stefano M,Tommaso BF,et al. How clinical experience leads anesthetists in the choice of double-lumen tube size [J]. J Clin Anesth,2016,32:1-3.
[14] Ideris SS,Che HM,Abdul Rahman MR,et al. Selection of an appropriate left-sided double-lumen tube size for one-lung ventilation among Asians [J]. Ann Card Anaesth,2017,20(1):28-32.
[15] Jain SV,Kollisch-Singule M,Satalin J,et al. The role of high airway pressure and dynamic strain on ventilator-induced lung injury in a heterogeneous acute lung injury model [J]. Intensive Care Med Exp,2017,5(1):25.
[16] Nieman GF,Satalin J,Andrews P,et al. Personalizing mechanical ventilation according to physiologic parameters to stabilize alveoli and minimize ventilator induced lung injury(VILI) [J]. Intensive Care Med Exp,2017,5(1):8.
[17] Zhang Y,Gao J,Wang CJ,et al. Low tidal volume ventilation?preconditioning ameliorates lipopolysaccharide-induced acute lung injury in rats [J]. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand,2016,60(6):780-789.
[18] Cherpanath TG,Smeding L,Hirsch A,et al. Low tidal volume ventilation ameliorates left ventricular dysfunction in mechanically ventilated rats following LPS-induced lung injury [J]. BMC Anesthesiol,2015,15:140.
[19] Beitler JR,Ghafouri TB,Jinadasa SP,et al. Favorable Neurocognitive Outcome with Low Tidal Volume Ventilation after Cardiac Arrest [J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med,2017,195(9):1198-1206.
[20] 趙亞杰,曹江北,米衛(wèi)東.肺保護性通氣策略在圍手術(shù)期的應用進展[J].臨床麻醉學雜志,2016,32(12):1229-1232.
[21] 王飛,唐魯,高成杰.全麻手術(shù)中肺保護性通氣策略研究進展[J].人民軍醫(yī),2015,58(11):1355-1356.
[22] 司嘯辰.呼吸機系統(tǒng)定標誤差對機械通氣性能影響的分析及質(zhì)量控制[J].中國醫(yī)學裝備,2016,13(6):23-25.
[23] Cohen E. Double-lumen tube position should be confirmed by fiberoptic bronchoscopy [J]. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol,2004,17(1):1-6.
(收稿日期:2017-09-25 本文編輯:李岳澤)endprint