Literature DB >> 15535495

Gum elastic bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway.

J Brimacombe1, C Keller.   

Abstract

We tested the hypothesis that gum elastic-bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway is more frequently successful than introducer tool guided insertion after failed digital insertion. One hundred anaesthetized patients (ASA 1-2, aged 18 to 80 years) were randomized for the second insertion attempt using either the gum elastic bougie-guided or introducer tool techniques. The bougie-guided technique involved priming the drain tube with the bougie, placing the bougie in the oesophagus using laryngoscope guidance, digital insertion along the palato-pharyngeal curve, and bougie removal. The introducer tool technique involved attaching the introducer tool, single-handed rotation along the palatopharyngeal curve, and introducer tool removal. Failed insertion was classified as (i) failed passage into the pharynx, (ii) malposition, or (iii) ineffective ventilation. Any blood staining was documented. Insertion was more frequently successful (50/50 vs 15/50, P=0.0002) and faster (35+/-17 s vs 54+/-45 s, mean+/-SD, P=0.006) with the bougie-guided technique. All failed insertions with the introducer tool technique were successful with the bougie-guided technique. The aetiology of failed insertion was similar for the digital and introducer tool techniques in 94% (33/35) of patients. There was no blood staining on the bougie, laryngoscope or introducer tool at removal, but blood staining was more common on the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway with the introducer tool technique (9/50 vs 2/50, P=0.03). We conclude that the gum elastic bougie-guided insertion has a higher success rate and causes less trauma than the insertion tool insertion technique after failed digital insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15535495     DOI: 10.1177/0310057X0403200514

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care        ISSN: 0310-057X            Impact factor:   1.669


  7 in total

Review 1.  [Laryngeal masks. Possibilities and limits].

Authors:  H Hillebrand; J Motsch
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  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

3.  Techniques for the insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: comparison of the Foley airway stylet tool with the introducer tool in a prospective, randomized study.

Authors:  Mao-Kai Chen; Hung-Te Hsu; I-Cheng Lu; Chih-Kai Shih; Ya-Chun Shen; Kuang-Yi Tseng; Kuang-I Cheng
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 2.217

4.  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

Review 5.  A new approach to airway assessment-"Line of Sight" and more. Recommendations of the Task Force of Airway Management Foundation (AMF).

Authors:  Rakesh Kumar; Sunil Kumar; Anil Misra; Neera G Kumar; Akhilesh Gupta; Prashant Kumar; Divya Jain
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2020-09-15

6.  Ease and Safety of Securing Airway by Railroading ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway over Bougie versus Traditional Digital Insertion Technique.

Authors:  Pulak Tosh; Sunil Rajan; Naina Narayani; Lakshmi Kumar
Journal:  Anesth Essays Res       Date:  2021-11-07

7.  Comparative evaluation of gum-elastic bougie and introducer tool as aids in positioning of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in patients with simulated restricted neck mobility.

Authors:  Jennyl Maclean; Dk Tripathy; S Parthasarathy; M Ravishankar
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2013-05
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.