Literature DB >> 16398378

Comparison of the re-usable LMA Classic and two single-use laryngeal masks (LMA Unique and SoftSeal) in airway management by novice personnel.

M G E Tan1, E R C Chin, C S Kong, Y H Chan, P C Ip-Yam.   

Abstract

In a single-blind randomized trial, three types of laryngeal masks: the reusable LMA Classic, the single-use LMA Unique and SoftSeal were inserted by novice medical officers in anaesthesia. Five successive attempts were undertaken with each mask type. The order of the mask type insertion was randomly selected. Mean (SD) insertion times for LMA Classic, LMA Unique and Soft Seal were 32.9 (12.3), 39.6 (23.4) and 49.4 (50.4) seconds respectively. Differences were only significant between LMA Classic and SoftSeal (P=0.012). There were no significant differences in first attempt success rates (LMA Classic 80%, LMA Unique 77% and SoftSeal 62%). The SoftSeal was most frequently associated with blood on the mask (32%) compared to the LMA Unique (9%) and LMA Classic (6%). Sore throat was experienced in 14% of patients in the LMA Unique group versus 41% and 42% in the LMA Classic and SoftSeal groups respectively. Mean +/- SD oropharyngeal leak pressure was significantly higher in the SoftSeal (21+/-6 cmH2O) compared to the LMA Classic (17+/-7 cmH2O) and LMA Unique (16+/-6 cmH2O). Novice medical doctors can be taught to insert disposable laryngeal masks. The SoftSeal took longer to insert, which resulted in a higher incidence of blood on the mask, but success rates did not differ The LMA Unique was associated with the lowest incidence of sore throat in the immediate postoperative period. A higher oropharyngeal leak pressure with the SoftSeal may indicate improved airway seal and protection against aspiration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16398378     DOI: 10.1177/0310057X0503300606

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


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of Supreme(®) and Soft Seal(®) laryngeal masks for airway management during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in novice doctors: a manikin study.

Authors:  Hanako Kohama; Nobuyasu Komasawa; Ryusuke Ueki; Aoi Samma; Masashi Nakagawa; Shin-ichi Nishi; Yoshiroh Kaminoh
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 2.078

2.  Developing the skill of laryngeal mask insertion: prospective single center study.

Authors:  S Mohr; M A Weigand; S Hofer; E Martin; A Gries; A Walther; M Bernhard
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 1.041

3.  Comparison of Laryngeal Mask Supreme® and Soft Seal® for airway management in several positions.

Authors:  Nobuyasu Komasawa; Ryusuke Ueki; Akari Fujii; Aoi Samma; Masashi Nakagawa; Shin-ich Nishi; Yoshiroh Kaminoh
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 2.078

4.  Comparison of positional shift of supraglottic devices resulting from chest compressions: simulation using a manikin and automated chest compression system.

Authors:  Manabu Kitano; Nobuyasu Komasawa; Shunsuke Fujiwara; Toshiaki Minami
Journal:  Acute Med Surg       Date:  2014-10-20

5.  Randomised Comparison of the AMBU AuraOnce Laryngeal Mask and the LMA Unique Laryngeal Mask Airway in Spontaneously Breathing Adults.

Authors:  Daryl Lindsay Williams; James M Zeng; Karl D Alexander; David T Andrews
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2012-02-29

Review 6.  A Literature Review of Factors Related to Postoperative Sore Throat.

Authors:  Yuta Mitobe; Yuri Yamaguchi; Yasuko Baba; Tomomi Yoshioka; Kenji Nakagawa; Takeshi Itou; Kiyoyasu Kurahashi
Journal:  J Clin Med Res       Date:  2022-02-24

7.  Comparison of the clinical effectiveness between the streamlined liner of pharyngeal airway (SLIPA) and the laryngeal mask airway by novice personnel.

Authors:  Seok-Kyeong Oh; Byung Gun Lim; Heezoo Kim; Sang Ho Lim
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2012-08-14
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.