Objective To explore the effectiveness and safety of self-made washable endotracheal tube for subglottic secretion drainage. Methods Ordinary endotracheal tube and sputum aspirating tubes were used to make washable endotracheal tube for subglottic secretion drainage in our hospital. The self-made tubes were compared with washable endotracheal tube available on the market. The suction resistance, the cases of obstruction in the tubes, the average daily drainage, and the cases of infection of incisional wound were compared between the two kinds of tubes, and their safety was evaluated. Results After three days of application, the suction resistance of endotracheal tube available on the market increased, with six cases of the blockage of the lumen ( 85% ) , while that of self-made endotracheal tube did not change, with no cases of blockage ( 0% ) . There was significant difference between these two kinds of tubes ( P lt;0. 01) . The average daily drainage in the former was ( 16. 55 ±8. 66) mL/d; while that in the latter was ( 40. 12 ±25. 48) mL/d. There was no significant statistical difference between the two kinds of tubes ( P gt;0. 05) . The incidence ofinfection of incisional wound in the ordinary endotracheal tube was 50% ( 5 cases) ; that in the tubes available on the market was 28% ( 2 cases) ; that in the self-made tubes was 15% ( 2 cases) . There was significant difference among the three groups. When tube cuffs were inflated, the distance between the back edge of suction tubes and tube cuffs was was 2-4 mm. Conclusion Self-made washable endotracheal tubes are effective for subglottic secretion drainage with good safety and low price.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of laryngeal mask versus endotracheal tubes for laparoscopic surgery.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data and CBM databases were electronically searched to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about the efficacy and safety of laryngeal mask versus endotracheal tubes for laparoscopic surgery from inception to April, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 16 RCTs involving 1 593 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: there was no significant difference in the success rate of the first insertion (RR=0.99, 95%CI 0.96 to 1.02, P=0.55). The airway pressure of patients whose position were head higher than foot was significantly lower in the laryngeal mask group than in the tracheal intubation group (MD=–1.20, 95%CI –1.81 to –0.59, P=0.000 1), but there was no significant difference between two groups in reverse position patients (MD=0.48, 95%CI –0.90 to 1.87, P=0.49). The incidence of sore throat (RR=0.58, 95%CI 0.46 to 0.74, P<0.000 01), the incidence of blood stain (RR=0.48, 95%CI 0.30 to 0.77, P=0.002), the incidence of laryngeal spasm/bronchial spasm (OR=0.30, 95%CI 0.11 to 0.80, P=0.02) and the incidence of cough/hiccup (RR=0.10, 95%CI 0.07 to 0.15, P<0.000 01) in the laryngeal mask group were significantly lower than those in the tracheal intubation group.ConclusionThe current evidence shows that compared with tracheal intubation, laryngeal mask can effectively reduce airway pressure of patients whose position are head higher than foot. The risks of various complications are significant higher in tracheal intubation in laparoscopic surgery. Laryngeal mask can maintain patients' normal respiratory functions while reduce damage and do not increase the occurrence of reflux aspiration. Due to limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.