PURPOSE: To compare LMA-ProSeal (LMA-PS) with endotracheal tube (ETT) with respect to pulmonary ventilation and gastric distension during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: We randomized 109 ASA I-III adults to LMA-PS or ETT after stratifying them as non-obese or obese (body mass index > 30 kg x m-2). After preoxygenation, anesthesia was induced with propofol, fentanyl and rocuronium. An LMA-PS (women #4, men #5) or ETT (women 7 mm, men 8 mm) was inserted and the cuff inflated. A #14 gastric tube was passed into the stomach in every patient and connected to continuous suction. Anesthesia was maintained with nitrous oxide, oxygen and isoflurane. Ventilation was set at 10 mL x kg-1 and 10 breaths x min-1. The surgeon, blinded to the airway device, scored stomach size on an ordinal scale of 0-10 at insertion of the laparoscope and upon decompression of the pneumoperitoneum. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in SpO2 or P(ET)CO2 between the two groups before or during peritoneal insufflation in either non-obese or obese patients. Median (range) airway pressure at which oropharyngeal leak occurred during a leak test with LMA-PS was 34 (18-45) cm water. Change in gastric distension during surgery was similar in both groups. Four of 16 obese LMA-PS patients crossed over to ETT because of respiratory obstruction or airway leak. CONCLUSIONS: A correctly seated LMA-PS or ETT provided equally effective pulmonary ventilation without clinically significant gastric distension in all non-obese patients. Further studies are required to determine the acceptability of the LMA-PS for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in obese patients.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare LMA-ProSeal (LMA-PS) with endotracheal tube (ETT) with respect to pulmonary ventilation and gastric distension during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: We randomized 109 ASA I-III adults to LMA-PS or ETT after stratifying them as non-obese or obese (body mass index > 30 kg x m-2). After preoxygenation, anesthesia was induced with propofol, fentanyl and rocuronium. An LMA-PS (women #4, men #5) or ETT (women 7 mm, men 8 mm) was inserted and the cuff inflated. A #14 gastric tube was passed into the stomach in every patient and connected to continuous suction. Anesthesia was maintained with nitrous oxide, oxygen and isoflurane. Ventilation was set at 10 mL x kg-1 and 10 breaths x min-1. The surgeon, blinded to the airway device, scored stomach size on an ordinal scale of 0-10 at insertion of the laparoscope and upon decompression of the pneumoperitoneum. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in SpO2 or P(ET)CO2 between the two groups before or during peritoneal insufflation in either non-obese or obesepatients. Median (range) airway pressure at which oropharyngeal leak occurred during a leak test with LMA-PS was 34 (18-45) cm water. Change in gastric distension during surgery was similar in both groups. Four of 16 obese LMA-PSpatients crossed over to ETT because of respiratory obstruction or airway leak. CONCLUSIONS: A correctly seated LMA-PS or ETT provided equally effective pulmonary ventilation without clinically significant gastric distension in all non-obesepatients. Further studies are required to determine the acceptability of the LMA-PS for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in obesepatients.