4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Extent and localization of changes in upper airway caliber with varying concentrations of sevoflurane in children

期刊

ANESTHESIOLOGY
卷 105, 期 6, 页码 1147-1152

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200612000-00014

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Previous studies in humans suggest that inhibition of upper airway muscle activity is independent of the dose of inhalational anesthesia. Whether a dose-independent relation applies to changes in airway caliber is unknown. The authors sought to evaluate the configurational changes that lead to upper airway narrowing during inhalational anesthesia with sevoflurane and to determine whether these changes are dose dependent within a clinically relevant dose range. Methods: Fifteen children undergoing elective magnetic resonance imaging of the brain were studied. Magnetic resonance images of the upper airway were acquired at sevoflurane concentrations of 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC), administered in random sequence. At least 15 min was allowed for equilibration of inspired and alveolar partial pressures of sevoflurane. Images were acquired in early expiration at the level of the soft palate, base of the tongue, and tip of the epiglottis. Airway cross-sectional area (CSA), anteroposterior, and transverse dimension were determined using image-analysis software. Results: At each anatomical level, pharyngeal CSA decreased progressively with increasing depth of sevoflurane anesthesia (P < 0.001). Increasing the sevoflurane concentration from 0.5 to 1.0 MAC reduced airway CSA by 13-18%, and a further increase to 1.5 MAC resulted in an overall 28-34% reduction in CSA. The reduction in CSA was predominantly due to a decrease in anteroposterior dimension. Conclusions: Increasing the depth of sevoflurane anesthesia resulted in a relatively uniform reduction in pharyngeal caliber at each anatomical level studied. The effect of sevoflurane on upper airway caliber is dose dependent.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据