Literature DB >> 19373095

Laryngeal tube S II, ProSeal laryngeal mask, and EasyTube during elective surgery: a randomized controlled comparison with the endotracheal tube in nontrained professionals.

Erol Cavus1, Wiebke Deitmer, Helga Francksen, Goetz Serocki, Berthold Bein, Jens Scholz, Volker Doerges.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
OBJECTIVE: EasyTube (EZT), ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA), and Laryngeal tube S II (LTS II) have recently been introduced as supraglottic airway devices and have been proposed as emergency airway alternatives. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of the three devices, if used by anaesthesiologists without extensive hands-on training, with the endotracheal tube during routine surgical procedures.
METHODS: After informed consent, 88 ASA I-II patients scheduled for routine minor surgery were randomly allocated to EZT (n=22), PLMA (n=22), and LTS II (n=22) groups and the endotracheal tube (n=22) group, respectively. Overall success rates, insertion times, cuff pressures, and resulting airway leak pressures as well as subjective assessment of handling were determined.
RESULTS: Overall insertion success rate of the EZT, PLMA, LTS II, and endotracheal tube was 14 out of 22 (64%), 20 out of 22 (91%), 21 out of 22 (96%), and 21 out of 22 (96%), respectively. Time to first successful ventilation with the EZT was significantly (P<0.05) longer than that with PLMA, LTS II, and endotracheal tube [median (minimum-maximum): 56 (27-150), 25 (12-70), 24 (11-150), and 20 (8-74) s, respectively]. The lowest airway leak pressure could be observed with the EZT [median (minimum-maximum), 19 (9-40) cmH2O] and the highest airway leak pressure with the LTS II [median (minimum-maximum), 40 (22-40) cmH2O]. Subjective assessment of handling was significantly (P<0.05) poorer in the EZT group compared with PLMA, LTS II, and endotracheal tube groups, respectively.
CONCLUSION: In contrast to the EZT, both PLMA and LTS II proved to be suitable for routine airway management by anaesthesiologists without extensive hands-on device training.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19373095     DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32832a9932

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


  9 in total

1.  Randomized crossover study assessing oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiber optic positioning : Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme™ versus Laryngeal Tube LTS II™ size 2 in non-paralyzed anesthetized children.

Authors:  L Gasteiger; S Ofner; B Stögermüller; B Ziegler; J Brimacombe; C Keller
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  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

3.  Comparison of combitube, easy tube and tracheal tube for general anesthesia.

Authors:  Ashok Kumar Sethi; Manisha Desai; Asha Tyagi; Surendra Kumar
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2014-10

Review 4.  Insertion Success of the Laryngeal Tube in Emergency Airway Management.

Authors:  Michael Bernhard; André Gries; Alexandra Ramshorn-Zimmer; Volker Wenzel; Bjoern Hossfeld
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 3.411

5.  A randomised controlled trial comparing ProSeal laryngeal mask airway, i-gel and Laryngeal Tube Suction-D under general anaesthesia for elective surgical patients requiring controlled ventilation.

Authors:  Bikramjit Das; Rahul Varshney; Subhro Mitra
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2017-12

6.  The EasyTube during general anesthesia for minor surgery: A randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  Oliver Robak; Sonia Vaida; Luis Gaitini; Andreas Thierbach; Ricardo Urtubia; Peter Krafft; Michael Frass
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.889

7.  Evaluation of the optimal cuff volume and cuff pressure of the revised laryngeal tube "LTS-D" in surgical patients.

Authors:  Marc Kriege; Christian Alflen; Johannes Eisel; Thomas Ott; Tim Piepho; Ruediger R Noppens
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 2.217

8.  Randomised comparison of the effectiveness of the laryngeal mask airway supreme, i-gel and current practice in the initial airway management of prehospital cardiac arrest (REVIVE-Airways): a feasibility study research protocol.

Authors:  Jonathan Richard Benger; Sarah Voss; David Coates; Rosemary Greenwood; Jerry Nolan; Steven Rawstorne; Megan Rhys; Matthew Thomas
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-02-13       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Inter-center comparison of EasyTube and endotracheal tube during general anesthesia in minor elective surgery.

Authors:  Oliver Robak; Sonia Vaida; Mostafa Somri; Luis Gaitini; Lisa Füreder; Michael Frass; Lukasz Szarpak
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-02       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.