Literature DB >> 9579506

A randomized controlled trial comparing the cuffed oropharyngeal airway and the laryngeal mask airway in spontaneously breathing anesthetized adults.

R S Greenberg1, J Brimacombe, A Berry, V Gouze, S Piantadosi, E M Dake.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The cuffed oropharyngeal airway (COPA), a modified Guedel airway, was compared with the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) during spontaneous breathing anesthesia. Specifically examined were ease of use, physiologic tolerance, and the frequency of problems.
METHODS: Adult patients consented to random (2:1) assignment to either COPA (n = 302) or LMA (n = 151) for airway management during anesthesia with propofol, nitrous oxide, and oxygen.
RESULTS: Ease of insertion was similar, but the first-time successful insertion rate was higher with the LMA (COPA, 81% compared with LMA, 89%; P = 0.05). More brief manipulations (head tilt, chin lift, jaw thrust) were reported in the COPA group (average total number of manipulations: COPA, 1.1 +/- 1.6 compared with LMA, 0.1 +/- 0.2; P < 0.001). Continuous airway support was used more frequently in the COPA group (COPA, 30% compared with LMA, 0%; P < 0.0005). The incidences of aspiration, regurgitation, laryngospasm, wheezing, succinylcholine administration, oxygen saturation (SpO2) < 92%, failed use, and minor intraoperative problems were similar. When the airways were removed, blood was detected on the COPA less frequently than on the LMA (COPA, 5.8% compared with LMA, 15.3%; P = 0.001). The incidence of early and late sore throat was greater with the LMA (early: COPA, 4.7% compared with LMA, 21.9% [P = 0.001]; late: COPA, 8.4% compared with LMA, 16.1%; P = 0.01). The LMA did better than the COPA when anesthetists analyzed the technical aspects of the two devices.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the COPA and LMA are equivalent devices in terms of physiologic alterations and overall clinical problems associated with their use, the LMA was associated with a higher first-time insertion rate and fewer manipulations, suggesting that it is easier to use. The COPA was associated with less blood on the device and fewer sore throats, suggesting it may cause less pharyngeal trauma. Ultimately, both devices were similar in establishing a safe and effective airway for spontaneously breathing anesthetized adults.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9579506     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-199804000-00017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesthesiology        ISSN: 0003-3022            Impact factor:   7.892


  6 in total

1.  The air-Q(®) intubating laryngeal airway vs the LMA-ProSeal(TM) : a prospective, randomised trial of airway seal pressure.

Authors:  R E Galgon; K M Schroeder; S Han; A Andrei; A M Joffe
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 6.955

2.  Cuffed oropharyngeal airway for difficult airway management.

Authors:  Kazumi Takaishi; Shinji Kawahito; Shigemasa Tomioka; Satoru Eguchi; Hiroshi Kitahata
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2014

3.  Induction of anesthesia in a case of impossible mask ventilation.

Authors:  Amit Jain; Nidhi B Panda; Pawan Kumar
Journal:  Anesth Essays Res       Date:  2010 Jan-Jun

Review 4.  Nasal intubation: A comprehensive review.

Authors:  Varun Chauhan; Gaurav Acharya
Journal:  Indian J Crit Care Med       Date:  2016-11

5.  Intraoperative Laryngeal Mask Airway-Related Hiccup: An Overview.

Authors:  Johann Mathew; Shiqian Shen; Henry Liu
Journal:  Transl Perioper Pain Med       Date:  2019-10-14

6.  Propofol requirement for insertion of I-gel versus laryngeal mask airway: A comparative dose finding study using Dixon's up-and-down method.

Authors:  Nerurkar Aparna Ashay; Shaikh Wasim; Tendolkar Bharati Anil
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.