Literature DB >> 10861152

The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: A randomized, crossover study with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed, anesthetized patients.

J Brimacombe1, C Keller.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is a new laryngeal mask device with a modified cuff to improve seal and a drainage tube to provide a channel for regurgitated fluid and gastric tube placement. In the present randomized, crossover study, the authors tested the hypothesis that ease of insertion, airway sealing pressure, and fiberoptic position differ between the PLMA and the standard laryngeal mask airway (LMA). For the PLMA, we also assess ease of gastric tube placement and the efficacy of an introducer tool.
METHODS: Sixty paralyzed, anesthetized adult patients were studied. Both devices (only size 4) were inserted into each patient in random order. Airway sealing pressure and fiberoptic position were determined during cuff inflation from 0 to 40 ml in 10-ml increments. Gastric tube insertion was attempted with the PLMA if there was no gas leak from the drainage tube. In 60 additional patients, ease of insertion for the PLMA was compared with and without an introducer.
RESULTS: First-time success rates were higher (60 of 60 vs. 52 of 60; P = 0.003) and the effective airway time shorter (9 +/- 3 s vs20 +/- 18 s; P < 0.0001) for the LMA. There were no failed uses of either device within three attempts. Airway sealing pressure was 8-11 cm H2O higher for the PLMA at all cuff volumes (P < 0.00001) and was higher in females for both devices. Fiberoptic position was better with the LMA at all cuff volumes (P < 0.00001), but vocal cord visibility was similar (LMA, 59 of 60; PLMA, 56 of 60). For the PLMA, gastric tube placement was successful in 58 of 58 patients and took 9 +/- 5 s. First-time success rates were higher (59 of 60 vs53/60; P = 0.03) and the effective airway time shorter (15 +/- 13 s vs 23 +/- 18 s; P = 0.008) with the introducer.
CONCLUSION: The PLMA is capable of achieving a more effective seal than the LMA and facilitates gastric tube placement, but it is more difficult to insert unless an introducer tool is used. When correctly positioned, the PLMA isolates the glottis from the upper esophagus with possible implications for airway protection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10861152     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200007000-00019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesthesiology        ISSN: 0003-3022            Impact factor:   7.892


  51 in total

1.  Oral gastric tube-guided insertion of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask is an easy and noninvasive method for less experienced users.

Authors:  Takako Nagata; Yoshihiko Kishi; Hironobu Tanigami; Yuki Hiuge; Shunji Sonoda; Yoshifumi Ohashi; Kiyokazu Kagawa; Azusa Ushioda
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 2.078

2.  Muscle relaxant effects on insertion efficacy of the laryngeal mask ProSeal(®) in anesthetized patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Atsushi Fujiwara; Nobuyasu Komasawa; Isao Nishihara; Shinichiro Miyazaki; Shinichi Tatsumi; Wataru Nishimura; Toshiaki Minami
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 2.078

3.  [Coughing attacks and reflux after extubation].

Authors:  M Bergold; C Byhahn
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 1.041

4.  The air-Q(®) intubating laryngeal airway vs the LMA-ProSeal(TM) : a prospective, randomised trial of airway seal pressure.

Authors:  R E Galgon; K M Schroeder; S Han; A Andrei; A M Joffe
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 6.955

5.  The uses of laryngeal mask airway ProSeal™ and endobronchial blocker for one lung anesthesia.

Authors:  Prasert Sawasdiwipachai; Settapong Boonsri; Sirilak Suksompong; Paron Prowpan
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2015-03-28       Impact factor: 2.078

6.  [Use of the size 3 ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in children. Results of a randomized crossover investigation with the Classic laryngeal mask airway].

Authors:  K Goldmann; C Roettger; H Wulf
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 7.  ProSeal versus Classic laryngeal mask airway (LMA) for positive pressure ventilation in adults undergoing elective surgery.

Authors:  Muhammad Qamarul Hoda; Khalid Samad; Hameed Ullah
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-07-20

8.  The clinical effectiveness of the streamlined liner of pharyngeal airway (SLIPA) compared with the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal during general anesthesia.

Authors:  Yun Mi Choi; Su Man Cha; Hyun Kang; Chong Wha Baek; Yong Hun Jung; Young Cheol Woo; Jin Yun Kim; Gill Hoi Koo; Sun Gyoo Park
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2010-05-29

9.  Comparison of bougie-guided insertion of Proseal laryngeal mask airway with digital technique in adults.

Authors:  Anand Kuppusamy; Naheed Azhar
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2010-01

10.  Troubleshooting ProSeal LMA.

Authors:  Bimla Sharma; Jayashree Sood; Chand Sahai; V P Kumra
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2009-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.