PURPOSE: The use of an endobronchial blocker in conjunction with a supraglottic device in elective thoracic cases has never been studied. The aim of this study was to report the success rate and time to placement of the endobronchial blocker in anaesthetized patients with a laryngeal mask airway (LMA)-ProSeal™ in place. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, descriptive pilot study that enrolled 30 patients aged 18-75 years, with ASA I-III, who underwent elective thoracotomy or video-assisted thoracoscopy. We collected data on time to placement of the endobronchial blocker into the selected bronchus, time consumed for final blocker positioning and inflation, lung deflation score at chest opening, and postoperative airway complications. RESULTS: One patient was excluded because of high peak airway pressure during LMA ventilation. The time required for blocker placement in the right main bronchus was shorter [mean 160 (78-480) s] compared with that for the left main bronchus [225 (117-420) s]. The blocker was successfully placed on the first attempt in 25 patients. Lung deflation score graded by the surgeon was 8/10 (median). Minor postoperative airway complications, such as sore throat (28.6 %) and hoarseness of voice (17.9 %), were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The use of LMA-ProSeal™ in conjunction with the COOPDECH Endobronchial Blocker Tube may be considered an alternative one-lung ventilation technique in selected cases. However, success rates and time required for placement of the blocker seem dependent on the operator's skill. Although postoperative sore throat and hoarseness of voice were reported, these improved in 24 h.
PURPOSE: The use of an endobronchial blocker in conjunction with a supraglottic device in elective thoracic cases has never been studied. The aim of this study was to report the success rate and time to placement of the endobronchial blocker in anaesthetized patients with a laryngeal mask airway (LMA)-ProSeal™ in place. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, descriptive pilot study that enrolled 30 patients aged 18-75 years, with ASA I-III, who underwent elective thoracotomy or video-assisted thoracoscopy. We collected data on time to placement of the endobronchial blocker into the selected bronchus, time consumed for final blocker positioning and inflation, lung deflation score at chest opening, and postoperative airway complications. RESULTS: One patient was excluded because of high peak airway pressure during LMA ventilation. The time required for blocker placement in the right main bronchus was shorter [mean 160 (78-480) s] compared with that for the left main bronchus [225 (117-420) s]. The blocker was successfully placed on the first attempt in 25 patients. Lung deflation score graded by the surgeon was 8/10 (median). Minor postoperative airway complications, such as sore throat (28.6 %) and hoarseness of voice (17.9 %), were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The use of LMA-ProSeal™ in conjunction with the COOPDECH Endobronchial Blocker Tube may be considered an alternative one-lung ventilation technique in selected cases. However, success rates and time required for placement of the blocker seem dependent on the operator's skill. Although postoperative sore throat and hoarseness of voice were reported, these improved in 24 h.