Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorGümüş N.
dc.contributor.authorDilek A.
dc.contributor.authorÜlger F.
dc.contributor.authorKöksal E.
dc.contributor.authorÇetinoğlu E.Ç.
dc.contributor.authorÖzkan F.
dc.contributor.authorGüldoğuş F.
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T09:37:39Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T09:37:39Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.issn1304-0871
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5152/TJAR.2014.58815
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12712/4789
dc.description.abstractObjective: In this study, our objective was to compare the Cormack and Lehane (C-L) sight scores of direct laryngoscopy in endotracheal intubation with the endoscopic sight scores of the LMA CTrach and video laryngoscope. We also compared the success of endoscopy with the LMA CTrach and video laryngoscopy, intubation time, and its effects on haemodynamic and stress responses.Methods: The study included 100 patients, with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores I-III and aged 18-65, who will undergo elective surgery. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group C and Group V. The patients in both groups underwent direct laryngoscopy with a Macintosh laryngoscope, and their C-L scores were recorded. In Group C, the patients were intubated with the LMA CTrach, and in Group V, the patients were intubated with a video laryngoscope. Patients’ haemodynamic parameters, oxygen saturation, end-tidal carbondioxide, and endoscopic sight scores were recorded.Results: The demographic characteristics and the ASA classifications of the groups were similar. When endoscopic sight scores were compared with C-L, better sight was obtained in the LMA CTrach group; no significant difference was detected in Group V. Regarding the success of the intubation, no significant difference was detected between groups. However, when intubation times were compared, there was a significant difference between groups. The intubation time was longer in Group C. There was no difference between groups in terms of the percentage changes of haemodynamic parameters, oxygen saturation, and end-tidal carbondioxide values of the patients.Conclusion: In this study, when endoscopic sight scores were compared, better visualization was obtained in the LMA CTrach group. Therefore, in cases where intubation is difficult to apply in patients, the LMA CTrach can be an alternative application. © 2014 by Turkish Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Society.en_US
dc.language.isoturen_US
dc.publisherAVES Ibrahim Karaen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.5152/TJAR.2014.58815en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectEndoscopic sight scoresen_US
dc.subjectEndotracheal intubationen_US
dc.subjectLMA CTrachen_US
dc.subjectVideo laryngoscopeen_US
dc.titleComparison of LMA CTrach and video laryngoscope in endotracheal intubationen_US
dc.title.alternativeEndotrakeal entübasyonda LMA CTrach ve video laringoskop yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılmasıen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentOMÜen_US
dc.identifier.volume42en_US
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.startpage251en_US
dc.identifier.endpage256en_US
dc.relation.journalTurk Anesteziyoloji ve Reanimasyon Dernegi Dergisien_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster