Application of endoscopic laryngeal mask in obese patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopic mucosal resection
10.3760/cma.j.cn115455-20230904-00206
- VernacularTitle:内镜喉罩在肥胖患者行上消化道内镜下黏膜切除术中的应用
- Author:
Junsheng ZHU
1
;
Yaoyi GUO
;
Ke DING
;
Yanna SI
;
Pihong HOU
Author Information
1. 南京医科大学附属南京医院（南京市第一医院）麻醉疼痛与围术期医学科，南京 210000
- Keywords:
Laryngeal masks;
Endoscopic mucosal resection;
Obesity;
Endoscopy, digestive system
- From:
Chinese Journal of Postgraduates of Medicine
2024;47(5):475-480
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To analyze the efficacy of endoscopic laryngeal mask in obese patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).Methods:Adopting a prospective research approach, 90 obese patients who underwent upper gastrointestinal EMR from July 2020 to May 2022 in Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University were selected. The patients were divided into endoscopic laryngeal mask group (using general anesthesia with endoscopic laryngeal mask ventilation) and nasal catheter group (using conventional non intubated intravenous anesthesia) by random digits table method with 45 cases in each. The EMR time; minimum pulse oxygen saturation (SpO 2) during perioperative period; changes of SpO 2, mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate during perioperative period; palinesthesia time; postoperative postanesthesia care unit (PACU) residence time; adverse reactions; satisfaction levels of doctor and patient satisfaction were recorded. Results:There were no statistical difference in EMR time and postoperative PACU residence time between two groups ( P>0.05). There were no statistical difference in minimum SpO 2 preoperative and anesthesia induction period between two groups ( P>0.05); the minimum SpO 2 EMR period in endoscopic laryngeal mask group was significantly higher than those in nasal catheter group (0.990 ± 0.010 vs. 0.951 ± 0.037), and there was statistical difference ( P<0.01). There were no statistical difference in heart rate and MAP during perioperative period between two groups ( P>0.05). There were no statistical difference in SpO 2 entering the operating room and leaving the PACU between two groups ( P>0.05), SpO 2 immediately after endoscopic insertion and at the end of surgery in endoscopic laryngeal mask group was significantly higher than that in nasal catheter group (0.989 ± 0.009 vs. 0.976 ± 0.011 and 0.987 ± 0.010 vs. 0.981 ± 0.009), and there was statistical difference ( P<0.01). The palinesthesia time in endoscopic laryngeal mask group was significantly longer than that in nasal catheter group: (6.7 ± 1.1) min vs. (4.6 ± 1.2) min, and there was statistical difference ( P<0.01). Both groups did not experience aspiration, hoarseness or airway spasm. There were no statistical difference in the incidences of pharyngalgia, bradycardia, hypotension, abdominal pain and bloating, postoperative nausea and vomiting between two groups ( P>0.05). The incidence of bucking and body movement in endoscopic laryngeal mask group was significantly lower than that in nasal catheter group: 2.2% (1/45) vs. 24.4% (11/45), and there was statistical difference ( P<0.01). There were no statistical difference in the satisfaction level of patient between two groups ( P>0.05); the satisfaction levels of anesthesiologists and endoscopists in endoscopic laryngeal mask group were significantly higher than those in nasal catheter group: 95.6% (43/45) vs. 66.7% (30/45) and 88.9% (40/45) vs. 71.1% (32/45), and there were statistical differences ( P<0.01 or <0.05). Conclusions:The application of endoscopic laryngeal mask in upper gastrointestinal EMR in obese patients can effectively improve the hypoxia caused by insufficient ventilation. At the same time, it will not cause drastic fluctuations in hemodynamics, and it does not increase the incidence of throat discomfort, but it slightly extends the awakening time.
