Tahsin Simsek1, Ayten Saracoglu2, Ozlem Sezen1, Gul Cakmak3, Kemal Tolga Saracoglu1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Health University Kartal Dr. Lutfi Kirdar Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. 2. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Marmara University Medical School, Istanbul, Turkey. 3. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Marmara University Medical School, Istanbul, Turkey. drgulcakmak@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) insertion may not always be smooth without complications. Controversial results of several studies evaluating ideal insertion conditions have been published. This study compared the oropharyngeal leak pressure values and fiberoptic grading scores between blind and video-laryngoscope-guided LMA insertion. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned into blind insertion (n = 50) and video-laryngoscope guided insertion (n = 50) groups. The oropharyngeal leak pressure, peak airway pressure, fiberoptic grading score, first attempt success rate, hemodynamic parameters, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: All laryngeal mask airways were successfully inserted in both groups at the first attempt. The fiberoptic staging scores were: grade 1 in 8.2% of patients, grade 2 in 24.4% of patients, grade 3 in 44.8% of patients, grade 4 in 22.4% of patients in the control group. On the other hand, grade 1 in 2.2% of patients, grade 2 in 28.6% of patients, grade 3 in 51% of patients, grade 4 in 8.2% of patients in the VL group (p = 0.260). The peak airway pressure and LMA insertion time were similar between groups. However, the oropharyngeal leak pressure before extubation was significantly higher in the video-laryngoscope-guided insertion than blind insertion (36.29 ± 7.09 vs. 33.79 ± 8.84 cmH2O respectively, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our study suggest that the video-laryngoscope-guided LMA-Classic insertion with a standard blade technique may be a helpful alternative to blind insertion.
PURPOSE: Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) insertion may not always be smooth without complications. Controversial results of several studies evaluating ideal insertion conditions have been published. This study compared the oropharyngeal leak pressure values and fiberoptic grading scores between blind and video-laryngoscope-guided LMA insertion. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned into blind insertion (n = 50) and video-laryngoscope guided insertion (n = 50) groups. The oropharyngeal leak pressure, peak airway pressure, fiberoptic grading score, first attempt success rate, hemodynamic parameters, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: All laryngeal mask airways were successfully inserted in both groups at the first attempt. The fiberoptic staging scores were: grade 1 in 8.2% of patients, grade 2 in 24.4% of patients, grade 3 in 44.8% of patients, grade 4 in 22.4% of patients in the control group. On the other hand, grade 1 in 2.2% of patients, grade 2 in 28.6% of patients, grade 3 in 51% of patients, grade 4 in 8.2% of patients in the VL group (p = 0.260). The peak airway pressure and LMA insertion time were similar between groups. However, the oropharyngeal leak pressure before extubation was significantly higher in the video-laryngoscope-guided insertion than blind insertion (36.29 ± 7.09 vs. 33.79 ± 8.84 cmH2O respectively, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our study suggest that the video-laryngoscope-guided LMA-Classic insertion with a standard blade technique may be a helpful alternative to blind insertion.