Comparison of the LMA Supreme™ with the LMA Proseal™ for airway management in patients anaesthetized in prone position

被引:45
作者
Lopez, A. M. [1 ]
Valero, R. [1 ]
Hurtado, P. [1 ]
Gambus, P. [1 ]
Pons, M. [1 ]
Anglada, T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Clin Barcelona, Dept Anaesthesiol, E-08036 Barcelona, Spain
关键词
airway equipment; complications; laryngeal mask airway; prone position; LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY; SURGERY; ANESTHESIA; INSERTION; SUPERIOR; EFFICACY; AUDIT;
D O I
10.1093/bja/aer104
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Background. The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) has been successfully used in patients in the prone position either for rescue or elective airway management. The reusable Proseal (TM) LMA (PLMA) and the single use Supreme (TM) LMA (SLMA) have been reported to be suitable for this purpose but few comparative data are available. In this study, we compared the clinical use of both devices in adult patients anaesthetized in the prone position. Methods. One hundred and twenty patients undergoing surgery in the prone position were randomized to receive either the PLMA or the SLMA for airway management. Patients positioned themselves in the prone position and after pre-oxygenation, anaesthesia was induced using a target-controlled i.v. infusion of propofol and remifentanil. All PLMAs and SLMAs were inserted by experienced anaesthetists using a guided and a standard technique respectively. Ease of facemask ventilation, time and number of attempts needed for insertion, quality of ventilation, airway seal pressure, fibreoptic view, and complications were compared. Results. There were no differences between groups in insertion time or first attempt success (100% vs 98%). The PLMA required fewer manipulations (3% vs 15%; P = 0.02) to achieve effective ventilation and provided a higher seal pressure (mean [SD] 31 [4] vs 27 [4] cm H(2)O; P<0.01). The fibrescopic view of the vocal cords was similar, although easier to achieve with the PLMA. The complication rate was low and similar between the groups. Blood was present on masks in 7% vs 8% and sore throat in 3% vs 5% of patients with the PLMA and SLMA, respectively. Conclusions. Airway management in patients anaesthetized in the prone position was efficient with both devices, although the PLMA required fewer manipulations and achieved a higher seal pressure.
引用
收藏
页码:265 / 271
页数:7
相关论文
共 21 条
  • [1] Gum elastic Bongie-guided insetfion of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway is superior to the digital and introducer tool techniques
    Brimacombe, J
    Keller, C
    Judd, DV
    [J]. ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2004, 100 (01) : 25 - 29
  • [2] Aspiration of gastric contents during use of a ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway secondary to unidentified foldover malposition
    Brimacombe, J
    Keller, C
    [J]. ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2003, 97 (04) : 1192 - 1194
  • [3] Stability of the LMA-ProSeal® and standard laryngeal mask airway in different head and neck positions:: a randomized crossover study
    Brimacombe, J
    Keller, C
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2003, 20 (01) : 65 - 69
  • [4] The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in prone patients: a retrospective audit of 245 patients
    Brimacombe, J. R.
    Wenzel, V.
    Keller, C.
    [J]. ANAESTHESIA AND INTENSIVE CARE, 2007, 35 (02) : 222 - 225
  • [5] Evaluation of the LMA Supreme™ in 100 non-paralysed patients
    Cook, T. M.
    Gatward, J. J.
    Handel, J.
    Hardy, R.
    Thompson, C.
    Srivastava, R.
    Clarke, P. A.
    [J]. ANAESTHESIA, 2009, 64 (05) : 555 - 562
  • [6] Anaesthesia in the prone position
    Edgcombe, H.
    Carter, K.
    Yarrow, S.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2008, 100 (02) : 165 - 183
  • [7] The Laryngeal Mask Airway SupremeTM- a single use laryngeal mask airway with an oesophageal vent. A randomised, cross-over study with the Laryngeal Mask Airway ProSealTM in paralysed, anaesthetised patients
    Eschertzhuber, S.
    Brimacombe, J.
    Hohlrieder, M.
    Keller, C.
    [J]. ANAESTHESIA, 2009, 64 (01) : 79 - 83
  • [8] García-Aguado R, 2006, CAN J ANAESTH, V53, P398, DOI 10.1007/BF03022507
  • [9] A new supraglottic airway device: LMA-Supreme™, comparison with LMA-Proseal™
    Hosten, T.
    Gurkan, Y.
    Ozdamar, D.
    Tekin, M.
    Toker, K.
    Solak, M.
    [J]. ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2009, 53 (07) : 852 - 857
  • [10] Comparison of the single-use LMA Supreme with the reusable ProSeal LMA for anaesthesia in gynaecological laparoscopic surgery
    Lee, A. K. Y.
    Tey, J. B. L.
    Lim, Y.
    Sia, A. T. H.
    [J]. ANAESTHESIA AND INTENSIVE CARE, 2009, 37 (05) : 815 - 819