- 【Updated on May 12, 2025】 Integration of CiNii Dissertations and CiNii Books into CiNii Research
- Trial version of CiNii Research Automatic Translation feature is available on CiNii Labs
- Suspension and deletion of data provided by Nikkei BP
- Regarding the recording of “Research Data” and “Evidence Data”
EXPERIENCE OF INTRANASAL INTRODUCTION OF A NASAL DRAINAGE TUBE BY THE “GUIDEWIRE SINGLE METHOD”
-
- IIDA Tomoya
- Department of Gastroenterology, Muroran City General Hospital.
-
- KANETO Hiroyuki
- Department of Gastroenterology, Muroran City General Hospital.
-
- WAGATSUMA Kohei
- Department of Gastroenterology, Muroran City General Hospital.
-
- SASAKI Hajime
- Department of Gastroenterology, Muroran City General Hospital.
-
- NAGANAWA Yumiko
- Department of Gastroenterology, Muroran City General Hospital.
-
- ISHIGAMI Keisuke
- Department of Gastroenterology, Muroran City General Hospital.
-
- MURAKAMI Kayo
- Department of Gastroenterology, Muroran City General Hospital.
-
- NAKAGAKI Suguru
- Department of Gastroenterology, Muroran City General Hospital.
-
- SATOH Shuji
- Department of Gastroenterology, Muroran City General Hospital.
-
- SHIMIZU Haruo
- Department of Gastroenterology, Muroran City General Hospital.
Bibliographic Information
- Other Title
-
- 「ガイドワイヤー単独法」を用いた経鼻ドレナージチューブの鼻腔内誘導法に関する経験
Search this article
Description
Conventionally, as a method of introducing an intranasal drainage tube, the “conventional method” using a laryngoscope has been common. However, recently, the usefulness of the “roping method” which uses a soft catheter and a guidewire (GW), and that of the “GW single method” which introduces the tube with only a GW, have been reported. We experienced 110 cases of intranasal introduction of a nasal drainage tube by the “guidewire single method”.<BR>We studied 110 consecutive patients in whom a nasal drainage tube was inserted. We decided to use the “roping method” if the tube could not be inserted by the GW single method within 5 minutes. Furthermore, we decided to perform the “conventional method” if the tube could not be introduced by the roping method within 5 minutes. We measured time A [from the beginning to introduction of the GW outside the oral cavity], time B [from the introduction of the GW outside the oral cavity to final placement of the drainage tube], time C [time A+time B ; from the beginning to the end], and the length of time of undergoing X-ray fluoroscopic observation. We studied the success rate of the “GW single method”, complications, and factors affecting time A to C.<BR>The median time of A, B, and C and of undergoing X-ray fluoroscopic observation were 58.0seconds, 61.0seconds, 124seconds, and 59.5 seconds, respectively. The success rate of the “GW single method” was 99.1%. Serious complications were not recognized. We studied several factors such as age, sex, height, weight, body mass index (BMI), examination type, drainage tube diameter, and physician. BMI was a factor affecting time B. Although the physician was a factor affecting time A to C and the length of time of performing X-ray fluoroscopic observation, this difference was considered to disappear with experience.<BR>The “GW single method” was considered to be a simple method that can be performed safely.
Journal
-
- GASTROENTEROLOGICAL ENDOSCOPY
-
GASTROENTEROLOGICAL ENDOSCOPY 56 (12), 3994-4001, 2014
Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society
- Tweet
Keywords
Details 詳細情報について
-
- CRID
- 1390282679199194368
-
- NII Article ID
- 130004811784
-
- ISSN
- 18845738
- 03871207
-
- Text Lang
- ja
-
- Data Source
-
- JaLC
- CiNii Articles
-
- Abstract License Flag
- Disallowed