Literature DB >> 18028578

Flexible laryngeal mask as an alternative to reinforced tracheal tube for upper chest, head and neck oncoplastic surgery.

C Martin-Castro1, A Montero.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
OBJECTIVE: The flexible laryngeal mask airway has been mostly used in spontaneous ventilated children during short procedures to avoid the risk of kinking; little information has been reported about its airway morbidity. The aim of the study was to compare this airway device with the reinforced tracheal tube in mechanically ventilated adult patients.
METHODS: 120 adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia for breast, head and neck oncoplastic surgery, expected to last up to 3 h, were stratified into two airway groups: flexible laryngeal mask airway (n = 60) or reinforced tracheal tube (n = 60). Within each group, patients were randomly allocated to one of the two maintenance anaesthetic subgroups: propofol (n = 30) or sevoflurane (n = 30). Ease of insertion and haemodynamic stress response to placement, ventilation and postoperative morbidity were studied.
RESULTS: Easy insertion rate was greater for the flexible laryngeal mask airway (93% vs. 77%, P = 0.01), and the overall success in insertion rate was 100% for both groups. Haemodynamic changes were significantly higher after inserting reinforced tracheal tube (P < 0.001). Oxygen saturation and capnography were comparable in both groups but airway pressure was lower with flexible laryngeal mask airway (P = 0.002). Sore throat, cough and dysphonia were lest frequent with flexible laryngeal mask airway (P < 0.01); also more patients in this group felt comfortable. Sevoflurane gave better results in emergence time, regardless of the airway device used.
CONCLUSION: During anaesthesia in mechanically ventilated adult patients, both devices function adequately, are stable and protect the airway. Flexible laryngeal mask airway results in less postoperative morbidity than reinforced tracheal tube.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18028578     DOI: 10.1017/S0265021507002980

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol        ISSN: 0265-0215            Impact factor:   4.330


  7 in total

1.  Prospective randomized controlled trial on the use of flexible reinforced laryngeal mask airway (LMA) during total thyroidectomy: effects on postoperative laryngopharyngeal symptoms.

Authors:  Jung-Hee Ryu; Cha Kyong Yom; Cha-Kyoung Yom; Do-Joong Park; Kyu-Hyung Kim; Sang-Hwan Do; Seok-Ha Yoo; Ah-Young Oh
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Comparison Between the Protector™ Laryngeal Mask Airway and the Endotracheal Tube for Minimally Invasive Thyroid and Parathyroid Surgery.

Authors:  Georgios Kotsovolis; Ioannis Pliakos; Stavros Panidis; Dimitrios Gkinas; Theodosios Papavramidis
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Airway Complications in Intubated Versus Laryngeal Mask Airway-Managed Dentistry: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Jordan Prince; Cameron Goertzen; Maryam Zanjir; Michelle Wong; Amir Azarpazhooh
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2021-12-01

4.  Effect of low dose rocuronium in preventing ventilation leak for flexible laryngeal mask airway during radical mastectomy.

Authors:  Ya-Hong Gong; Jie Yi; Qian Zhang; Li Xu
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-08-15

Review 5.  Airway Complications during and after General Anesthesia: A Comparison, Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Using Flexible Laryngeal Mask Airways and Endotracheal Tubes.

Authors:  Rui Xu; Ying Lian; Wen Xian Li
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-07-14       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Laryngeal mask airway reduces incidence of post-operative sore throat after thyroid surgery compared with endotracheal tube: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Yahong Gong; Xiaohan Xu; Jin Wang; Lu Che; Weijia Wang; Jie Yi
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 2.217

7.  Lightwand-Guided Insertion of Flexible Reinforced Laryngeal Mask Airway: Comparison with Standard Digital Manipulation Insertion.

Authors:  Dae Hee Kim; Yun Jeong Chae; Sang Kee Min; Eun Ji Ha; Ji Young Yoo
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2021-01-11
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.