Cargando…

Comparison of Three Methods in Improving Bag Mask Ventilation

INTRODUCTION: Increasedlife expectancy in populations has brought along specific new scenarios in the fields of medicine for the elderly; prevalence of physical complications such as edentulism and patients with dentures is growing. Management of anesthesia and ventilation in this group of patients...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Golzari, Samad EJ, Soleimanpour, Hassan, Mehryar, Hamidreza, Salarilak, Shaker, Mahmoodpoor, Ata, Panahi, Jafar Rahimi, Afhami, Mohammadreza, Sabahi, Majid, Hassani, Zahra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4018598/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24829737
_version_ 1782480095979503616
author Golzari, Samad EJ
Soleimanpour, Hassan
Mehryar, Hamidreza
Salarilak, Shaker
Mahmoodpoor, Ata
Panahi, Jafar Rahimi
Afhami, Mohammadreza
Sabahi, Majid
Hassani, Zahra
author_facet Golzari, Samad EJ
Soleimanpour, Hassan
Mehryar, Hamidreza
Salarilak, Shaker
Mahmoodpoor, Ata
Panahi, Jafar Rahimi
Afhami, Mohammadreza
Sabahi, Majid
Hassani, Zahra
author_sort Golzari, Samad EJ
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Increasedlife expectancy in populations has brought along specific new scenarios in the fields of medicine for the elderly; prevalence of physical complications such as edentulism and patients with dentures is growing. Management of anesthesia and ventilation in this group of patients has turned into a great challenge. Some researchers suggest dentures to be left in place during bag-mask ventilation; yet, no unanimous agreement exists in this regard. METHODS: In a single blind randomized clinical trial, we studied 300 patients with ASA class I, II (American Society of Anesthesiologists), Mallampati class (I, II) and aged over 55 years in three groups. After induction of anesthesia, in group G dentures were removed and in each buccal space an eight-layer 10 × 10 cm gauze and an oral airway were placed. In group D, the dentures and an oral airway were left in place. In group C (control), after removing dentures just an appropriate oral airway was placed. Then, each three group underwent bag-mask ventilation. Success of bag-mask ventilation (BMV) was considered as increase in end-tidal carbon dioxide to more than 20 mmHg and back to baseline with fresh gas flow of 3 L/min and adjustable pressure limiting valve pressure of 20 cm H(2)O. Success rates were evaluated between groups. RESULTS: Effective BMV was possible in 91 (91%), 64 (64%) and 41 (41%) patients in groups G, D and C respectively. The differences were statistically significant. Successful BMV rate was significantly higher in female patients in group G compared to group C; 43/44 versus 25/46 individuals, P = 0.0001, odds ratio = 0.03, 95% confidence interval (0.00, 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Leaving dentures in place in edentulous patients after inducing anesthesia improves bag-mask ventilation. However, placing folded compressed gauze in buccal space leads to more significant improvement in BMV compared to leaving dentures in place.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4018598
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40185982014-05-14 Comparison of Three Methods in Improving Bag Mask Ventilation Golzari, Samad EJ Soleimanpour, Hassan Mehryar, Hamidreza Salarilak, Shaker Mahmoodpoor, Ata Panahi, Jafar Rahimi Afhami, Mohammadreza Sabahi, Majid Hassani, Zahra Int J Prev Med Original Article INTRODUCTION: Increasedlife expectancy in populations has brought along specific new scenarios in the fields of medicine for the elderly; prevalence of physical complications such as edentulism and patients with dentures is growing. Management of anesthesia and ventilation in this group of patients has turned into a great challenge. Some researchers suggest dentures to be left in place during bag-mask ventilation; yet, no unanimous agreement exists in this regard. METHODS: In a single blind randomized clinical trial, we studied 300 patients with ASA class I, II (American Society of Anesthesiologists), Mallampati class (I, II) and aged over 55 years in three groups. After induction of anesthesia, in group G dentures were removed and in each buccal space an eight-layer 10 × 10 cm gauze and an oral airway were placed. In group D, the dentures and an oral airway were left in place. In group C (control), after removing dentures just an appropriate oral airway was placed. Then, each three group underwent bag-mask ventilation. Success of bag-mask ventilation (BMV) was considered as increase in end-tidal carbon dioxide to more than 20 mmHg and back to baseline with fresh gas flow of 3 L/min and adjustable pressure limiting valve pressure of 20 cm H(2)O. Success rates were evaluated between groups. RESULTS: Effective BMV was possible in 91 (91%), 64 (64%) and 41 (41%) patients in groups G, D and C respectively. The differences were statistically significant. Successful BMV rate was significantly higher in female patients in group G compared to group C; 43/44 versus 25/46 individuals, P = 0.0001, odds ratio = 0.03, 95% confidence interval (0.00, 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Leaving dentures in place in edentulous patients after inducing anesthesia improves bag-mask ventilation. However, placing folded compressed gauze in buccal space leads to more significant improvement in BMV compared to leaving dentures in place. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4018598/ /pubmed/24829737 Text en Copyright: © International Journal of Preventive Medicine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Golzari, Samad EJ
Soleimanpour, Hassan
Mehryar, Hamidreza
Salarilak, Shaker
Mahmoodpoor, Ata
Panahi, Jafar Rahimi
Afhami, Mohammadreza
Sabahi, Majid
Hassani, Zahra
Comparison of Three Methods in Improving Bag Mask Ventilation
title Comparison of Three Methods in Improving Bag Mask Ventilation
title_full Comparison of Three Methods in Improving Bag Mask Ventilation
title_fullStr Comparison of Three Methods in Improving Bag Mask Ventilation
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Three Methods in Improving Bag Mask Ventilation
title_short Comparison of Three Methods in Improving Bag Mask Ventilation
title_sort comparison of three methods in improving bag mask ventilation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4018598/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24829737
work_keys_str_mv AT golzarisamadej comparisonofthreemethodsinimprovingbagmaskventilation
AT soleimanpourhassan comparisonofthreemethodsinimprovingbagmaskventilation
AT mehryarhamidreza comparisonofthreemethodsinimprovingbagmaskventilation
AT salarilakshaker comparisonofthreemethodsinimprovingbagmaskventilation
AT mahmoodpoorata comparisonofthreemethodsinimprovingbagmaskventilation
AT panahijafarrahimi comparisonofthreemethodsinimprovingbagmaskventilation
AT afhamimohammadreza comparisonofthreemethodsinimprovingbagmaskventilation
AT sabahimajid comparisonofthreemethodsinimprovingbagmaskventilation
AT hassanizahra comparisonofthreemethodsinimprovingbagmaskventilation