Crossover comparison of airway sealing pressures of 1.5 and 2 size LMA-ProSeal™ and LMA-Classic™ in children, measured with the manometric stability test

被引:11
作者
Karippacheril, John G. [1 ]
Varghese, Elsa [1 ]
机构
[1] Manipal Univ, Kasturba Med Coll, Dept Anaesthesiol, Manipal 576104, Karnataka, India
关键词
crossover; comparison; ProSeal LMA; manometric stability; children; LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY; PEDIATRIC-PATIENTS; PROSEAL(TM); VENTILATION;
D O I
10.1111/j.1460-9592.2011.03554.x
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
P>Objectives: To compare airway sealing pressures, air leak, optimal positioning of the LMA-ProSeal (TM) and LMA-Classic (TM) in children. Methods: A crossover, randomized study was conducted in children aged 6 months-7 years weighing < 20 kg scheduled for minor elective surgery under GA with sevoflurane. Either a 1.5 or 2-size LMA-ProSeal (TM) or LMA-Classic (TM) was inserted first. Optimal position of the devices was evaluated by fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB). Airway sealing pressures were determined under standardized conditions by the manometric stability test at the proximal end of the LMA device. Gas leak observed by auscultation over the neck and epigastrium was noted at these pressures. Results: Twenty-seven children of mean ages 29.48 +/- 19.81 months and mean weight 11.23 +/- 3.28 kg were included for evaluation. Airway sealing pressures were noted to be similar: 23.11 +/- 8.28 cm H(2)O with LMA-ProSeal (TM) and 23.26 +/- 8.21 cm H(2)O with LMA-Classic (TM). At these sealing pressures, air leak in the neck was observed in 21/27 children with LMA-ProSeal (TM) compared with 24/27 with LMA-Classic (TM) (P = 0.467). Optimal device positioning as viewed by FOB was seen in 14/27(51.8%) children with LMA-ProSeal (TM) and 15/27(55.6%) with LMA-Classic (TM). Airway sealing pressures with suboptimal position of LMA-ProSeal (TM) was 22.23 +/- 10.23 cm H(2)O and with optimal position 23.93 +/- 6.25 cm H(2)O (P = 0.612). Conclusion: The LMA-ProSeal (TM) and LMA-Classic (TM) size 1.5 and 2 provide similar mean airway sealing pressures as assessed by the manometric stability test under standardized conditions, with similar air leak and optimal positioning.
引用
收藏
页码:668 / 672
页数:5
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]   The LMA 'ProSeal' - a laryngeal mask with an oesophageal vent [J].
Brain, AIJ ;
Verghese, C ;
Strube, PJ .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2000, 84 (05) :650-654
[2]   The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway - A randomized, crossover study with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed, anesthetized patients [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2000, 93 (01) :104-109
[3]   The size 11/2 ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway in infants:: A randomized, crossover investigation with the Classic™ laryngeal mask airway [J].
Goldmann, K ;
Roettger, C ;
Wulf, H .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2006, 102 (02) :405-410
[4]   Use of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway for pressure-controlled ventilation with and without positive end-expiratory pressure in paediatric patients:: a randomized, controlled study [J].
Goldmann, K ;
Roettger, C ;
Wulf, H .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2005, 95 (06) :831-834
[5]   A randomized crossover comparison of the size 2 1/2 laryngeal mask airway ProSeal™ versus Laryngeal Mask Airway-Classic™ in pediatric patients [J].
Goldmann, K ;
Jakob, C .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2005, 100 (06) :1605-1610
[6]   Size 2 ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway:: a randomized, crossover investigation with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paediatric patients [J].
Goldmann, K ;
Jakob, C .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2005, 94 (03) :385-389
[7]   Reduced air leakage by adjusting the cuff pressure in pediatric laryngeal mask airways during spontaneous ventilation [J].
Hockings, Lisen ;
Heaney, Mairead ;
Chambers, Neil A. ;
Erb, Thomas O. ;
von Ungern-Sternberg, Britta S. .
PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2010, 20 (04) :313-317
[8]   Comparison of laryngeal mask airway (LMA)-Proseal™ and the LMA-Classic™ in ventilated children receiving neuromuscular blockade [J].
Lardner D.R.R. ;
Cox R.G. ;
Ewen A. ;
Dickinson D. .
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d’anesthésie, 2008, 55 (1) :29-35
[9]   A randomized non-crossover study comparing the ProSeal™ and Classic™ laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized children [J].
Lopez-Gil, M ;
Brimacombe, J ;
Garcia, G .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2005, 95 (06) :827-830
[10]   The ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway in children [J].
Lopez-Gil, M ;
Brimacombe, J .
PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2005, 15 (03) :229-234