BACKGROUND: Since the cuffed oropharyngeal airway (COPA) has been suggested to cause less pharyngeal trauma than the laryngeal mask airway (LMA), we conducted a prospective, randomised study to compare haemodynamic changes after placing either the COPA or LMA in healthy anaesthetised adults. METHODS: After standard midazolam premedication (0.05 mg kg(-1) IV), general anaesthesia (IV propofol 2 mg kg(-1)) was induced in 60 ASA physical status I-II, 18-65-yr-old patients, who were randomly allocated to receive COPA (n=30) or LMA (n= 30) placement and then mechanically ventilated using a 60% nitrous oxide and 1% isoflurane in oxygen mixture (TV=8 ml kg(-1), RR=12 b.p.m., I/E=1/2). Haemodynamic variables were recorded 20 min after the midazolam premedication (baseline), and then every 1 min until 10 min after general anaesthesia induction. RESULTS: Nine patients of group COPA (30%) required chin lift, jaw thrust or head tilt to maintain adequate ventilation, while no problems were observed in the LMA group (P<0.0005); however, in no case did the designed extratracheal airway have to be removed due to unsuccessful mechanical ventilation, and no signs of gastric insufflation or regurgitation were reported. The maximum mean changes in haemodynamic variables were more marked after LMA placement (SAP: 12%+/-13%; DAP: 11%+/-18%; HR: 13%+/-16%) than COPA placement (SAP: -3%+/-18%; DAP: -5%+/-16%; HR: 4%+/-13%) (P<0.005, P<0.005, and P<0.01 for SAP, DAP and HR, respectively). Group LMA showed higher SAP and DAP values than group COPA only during the first 3 min after airway insertion. CONCLUSION: In healthy, anaesthetised patients, placing a cuffed oropharyngeal airway is associated with smaller cardiovascular changes after airway insertion compared with the laryngeal mask airway.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Since the cuffed oropharyngeal airway (COPA) has been suggested to cause less pharyngeal trauma than the laryngeal mask airway (LMA), we conducted a prospective, randomised study to compare haemodynamic changes after placing either the COPA or LMA in healthy anaesthetised adults. METHODS: After standard midazolam premedication (0.05 mg kg(-1) IV), general anaesthesia (IV propofol 2 mg kg(-1)) was induced in 60 ASA physical status I-II, 18-65-yr-old patients, who were randomly allocated to receive COPA (n=30) or LMA (n= 30) placement and then mechanically ventilated using a 60% nitrous oxide and 1% isoflurane in oxygen mixture (TV=8 ml kg(-1), RR=12 b.p.m., I/E=1/2). Haemodynamic variables were recorded 20 min after the midazolam premedication (baseline), and then every 1 min until 10 min after general anaesthesia induction. RESULTS: Nine patients of group COPA (30%) required chin lift, jaw thrust or head tilt to maintain adequate ventilation, while no problems were observed in the LMA group (P<0.0005); however, in no case did the designed extratracheal airway have to be removed due to unsuccessful mechanical ventilation, and no signs of gastric insufflation or regurgitation were reported. The maximum mean changes in haemodynamic variables were more marked after LMA placement (SAP: 12%+/-13%; DAP: 11%+/-18%; HR: 13%+/-16%) than COPA placement (SAP: -3%+/-18%; DAP: -5%+/-16%; HR: 4%+/-13%) (P<0.005, P<0.005, and P<0.01 for SAP, DAP and HR, respectively). Group LMA showed higher SAP and DAP values than group COPA only during the first 3 min after airway insertion. CONCLUSION: In healthy, anaesthetised patients, placing a cuffed oropharyngeal airway is associated with smaller cardiovascular changes after airway insertion compared with the laryngeal mask airway.