Literature DB >> 15277916

A comparison of sex- and weight-based ProSeal laryngeal mask size selection criteria: a randomized study of healthy anesthetized, paralyzed adult patients.

Shinichi Kihara1, Joseph R Brimacombe, Yuichi Yaguchi, Noriko Taguchi, Seiji Watanabe.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The authors compared the manufacturer's weight-based formula (size 3 for weight < 50 kg, size 4 for weight 50-70 kg, and size 5 for weight > 70 kg) with a sex-based formula (size 4 for women and size 5 for men) for selecting the appropriate size of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway.
METHODS: Two hundred thirty-seven healthy, anesthetized, paralyzed adult patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II; age, 18-80 yr) were randomly allocated for weight- or sex-based size selection. An experienced user inserted the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway with the digital technique. The following were compared: ease of insertion, oropharyngeal leak pressure, ease of ventilation, gas exchange, location of gas leak, anatomic position, mucosal injury, and postoperative pharyngolaryngeal problems. Intraoperative and postoperative data collection were unblinded and blinded, respectively.
RESULTS: Ease of insertion, anatomic position, gas exchange, mucosal injury, and postoperative pharyngolaryngeal problems were similar between groups. For the sex-based group, larger ProSeal laryngeal mask airways were selected more frequently (P < 0.0001), oropharyngeal leak pressure (P = 0.02) was higher, leak volume (P = 0.004) and leak fraction (P = 0.007) were lower, and oropharyngeal leaks (P = 0.03) were detected less frequently.
CONCLUSION: Size selection for the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway is equally effective using the manufacturer's weight-based formula or the sex-based formula in healthy, anesthetized, paralyzed adult patients, but leakage of small volumes of air from the mouth occurs less frequently with the sex-based formula.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15277916     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200408000-00014

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


  10 in total

Review 1.  [Extraglottic airway devices in the intensive care unit].

Authors:  S G Russo; O Moerer; E A Nickel; B Goetze; A Timmermann; M Quintel
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.041

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.  Comparison of the size 3 and size 4 ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized, non-paralyzed women: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Mi-Hyun Kim; Jung-Won Hwang; Eun-Sung Kim; Sung-Hee Han; Young-Tae Jeon; Sun-Mi Lee
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2014-09-24       Impact factor: 2.078

4.  Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients.

Authors:  Sebastian G Russo; Stephan Cremer; Tamara Galli; Christoph Eich; Anselm Bräuer; Thomas A Crozier; Martin Bauer; Micha Strack
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2012-08-07       Impact factor: 2.217

5.  Comparison of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway size 2 and 2½ in anesthetized and paralyzed pediatric patients with same weight group: A prospective randomized clinical study.

Authors:  Reena Mahajan; Susheela Taxak
Journal:  Anesth Essays Res       Date:  2014 Sep-Dec

6.  A novel technique for insertion of ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway: Comparison of the stylet tool with the introducer tool in a prospective, randomised study.

Authors:  Sheila Nainan Myatra; Vijaykumar Khandale; Friedrich Pühringer; Sushan Gupta; Sohan Lal Solanki; Jigeeshu V Divatia
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2017-06

7.  Preliminary evaluation of SaCoVLM™ video laryngeal mask airway in airway management for general anesthesia.

Authors:  Chun-Ling Yan; Ying Chen; Pei Sun; Zong-Yang Qv; Ming-Zhang Zuo
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 2.217

8.  Assessment of Neck Characteristics for Laryngeal Mask Airway Size Selection in Patients Who Underwent an Elective Ocular Surgery; A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Omid Aghadavoudi; Hamidreza Shetabi; Hamid Saryazdi; Susan Babayi
Journal:  Bull Emerg Trauma       Date:  2022-04

9.  Randomized Comparison of Actual and Ideal Body Weight for Size Selection of the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic in Overweight Patients.

Authors:  Min-Soo Kim; Jong Seok Lee; Sang Beom Nam; Hyo Jong Kang; Ji Eun Kim
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 2.153

10.  Effectiveness of Proseal laryngeal mask airway and laryngeal tube suction in elective non-laparoscopic surgeries of up to ninety minutes duration: A prospective, randomized study.

Authors:  Swapnil Verma; S P Sharma
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018 Jan-Mar
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.