Abstract:

Objective To compare the effects of clinical application and safety between domestic and imported double-lumen endobronchial tubes. Methods Sixty patients undergoing selective thoracic operations with one-lung ventilation were divided into three groups according to the use of different doublelumen endobronchial tubes: group A (domestic Tuoren-brand double-lumen endobronchial tube, n=20), group B (imported Portex-brand double-lumen endobronchial tube, n=20) and group C (imported Tyco-brand double-lumen endobronchial tube, n=20). The intubation time and number of placement attempts, the number of bronchofibroscopy after changing position and the level of pulmonary collapse state were recorded. The changes of inspiratory peak pressure (Ppeak) and pulmonary dynamic compliance (Cdyn) at different time points of supine position and lateral position with two-lung ventilation, 15 min and 30 min after one-lung ventilation and 5 min after two-lung ventilation were observed, and the prevalences of hoarseness and sore throat 24 h after operation were assessed. The parameters recorded or observed were statistically analysed. Results There was no significant difference in the intubation time and number of placement attempts, number of bronchofibroscopy after changing position, level of pulmonary collapse state, changes of Ppeak and Cdyn at the same time points and prevalences of hoarseness and sore throat among three groups (P>0.05). Conclusion There is no significant difference in effects of clinical application and safety among domestic and imported double-lumen endobronchial tubes. The domestic double-lumen endobronchial tube is highly cost-effective.

Key words: one-lung ventilation, double-lumen endobronchial tube, effect, safety