Literature DB >> 9822002

A prospective evaluation of clinical tests for placement of laryngeal mask airways.

S Joshi1, R R Sciacca, D R Solanki, W L Young, M M Mathru.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reliable tests of correct anatomic placement of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) may enhance safety during use and minimize the need for fiberoptic instrumentation during airway manipulation through the device. This study assessed the correlation between the outcomes of nine clinical tests to place the LMA and the anatomic position of the device as graded on a standard fiberoptic scale.
METHODS: During 150 anesthetics, the outcome of nine clinical tests of correct placement was individually scored as satisfactory (positive) or unsatisfactory (negative) for clinical use of the LMA. Anatomic placement was assessed (by fiberoptic evaluation) by an anesthesiologist, who was blinded to the placement of the device, as grade 1, vocal cords not seen; grade 2, cords plus the anterior epiglottis seen; grade 3, cords plus the posterior epiglottis seen; and grade 4, only vocal cords seen. The outcomes of clinical tests were correlated with fiberoptic grade.
RESULTS: Tests that correlated with the fiberoptic grade were the ability to generate an airway pressure of 20 cm water, the ability to ventilate manually, a black line on the LMA in midline, anterior movement of the larynx, outward movement of the LMA on inflation of the cuff, and movements of the reservoir bag with spontaneous breathing. Two tests, ability to generate airway pressure of 20 cm water and ability to ventilate manually, correlated with fiberoptic grades 4 and 3 combined (i.e., the epiglottis was supported by the LMA) and grade 2 (the epiglottis was not supported by the LMA). Tests with poor correlation with fiberoptic grade were the presence of resistance at the end of insertion, inability to advance LMA after inflation of the cuff, and presence of a capnographic trace.
CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of clinical tests correlates with the anatomic placement of LMAs, as judged by fiberoptic examination. Two tests that best correlated with the fiberoptic grade were the ability to generate airway pressure of 20 cm water and the ability to ventilate manually.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9822002     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-199811000-00014

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


  15 in total

Review 1.  [Laryngeal masks. Possibilities and limits].

Authors:  H Hillebrand; J Motsch
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  A prospective randomized comparison of airway seal using the novel vision-guided insertion of LMA-Supreme® and LMA-Protector®.

Authors:  André A J van Zundert; Kerstin H Wyssusek; Anita Pelecanos; Michelle Roets; Chandra M Kumar
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2019-04-05       Impact factor: 2.502

3.  Blind vs. video-laryngoscope-guided laryngeal mask insertion: A prospective randomized comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic grading.

Authors:  Tahsin Simsek; Ayten Saracoglu; Ozlem Sezen; Gul Cakmak; Kemal Tolga Saracoglu
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 1.977

4.  The clinical effectiveness of the streamlined liner of pharyngeal airway (SLIPA) compared with the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal during general anesthesia.

Authors:  Yun Mi Choi; Su Man Cha; Hyun Kang; Chong Wha Baek; Yong Hun Jung; Young Cheol Woo; Jin Yun Kim; Gill Hoi Koo; Sun Gyoo Park
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2010-05-29

5.  Randomised Comparison of the AMBU AuraOnce Laryngeal Mask and the LMA Unique Laryngeal Mask Airway in Spontaneously Breathing Adults.

Authors:  Daryl Lindsay Williams; James M Zeng; Karl D Alexander; David T Andrews
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2012-02-29

6.  Comparison of i-gel™ and laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized paralyzed patients.

Authors:  Seyed Mohammad Reza Hashemian; Navid Nouraei; Seyed Sadjad Razavi; Ebrahim Zaker; Alireza Jafari; Parivash Eftekhari; Golnar Radmand; Seyed Amir Mohajerani; Badiozzaman Radpay
Journal:  Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci       Date:  2014 Oct-Dec

7.  Influence of Head and Neck Position on Oropharyngeal Leak Pressure and Cuff Position with the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway and the I-Gel: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Sandeep Kumar Mishra; Mohammad Nawaz; M V S Satyapraksh; Satyen Parida; Prasanna Udupi Bidkar; Balachander Hemavathy; Pankaj Kundra
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2015-01-11

8.  A randomized prospective controlled trial comparing the laryngeal tube suction disposable and the supreme laryngeal mask airway: the influence of head and neck position on oropharyngeal seal pressure.

Authors:  Mostafa Somri; Sonia Vaida; Gustavo Garcia Fornari; Gabriela Renee Mendoza; Pedro Charco-Mora; Naser Hawash; Ibrahim Matter; Forat Swaid; Luis Gaitini
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2016-10-06       Impact factor: 2.217

9.  The AMBU® Aura-i™ Laryngeal Mask and LMA Supreme™: A Randomized Trial of Clinical Performance and Fibreoptic Positioning in Unparalysed, Anaesthetised Patients by Novices.

Authors:  Zanahriah Yahaya; Wendy H Teoh; Nora A Dintan; Ravi Agrawal
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2016-10-25

10.  Baby cuff as a reason for laryngeal mask airway cuff malfunction during airway management for anesthesia.

Authors:  Jafar Rahimi Panahi; Ata Mahmoodpoor; Samad E J Golzari; Hassan Soleimanpour
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2014-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.