Mucosal pressure and oropharyngeal leak pressure with the ProSeal versus laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized paralysed patients

被引:117
作者
Keller, C
Brimacombe, J [1 ]
机构
[1] Leopold Franzens Univ, Dept Anaesthesia & Intens Care Med, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
[2] Univ Queensland, Dept Anaesthesia & Intens Care, Cairns Base Hosp, St Lucia, Qld 4067, Australia
关键词
equipment; mask anaesthetic; airway; complications;
D O I
10.1093/bja/85.2.262
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is a new laryngeal mask device with a larger, wedge-shaped cuff and a drainage tube. We tested the hypothesis that directly measured mucosal pressure and oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) are higher for the PLMA compared with the laryngeal mask airway (LMA dagger). We also assess the mechanism of seal, and the reliability of cuff volume, in vivo intracuff pressure and calculated mucosal pressure tin vivo minus in vitro intracuff pressure) to predict directly measured mucosal pressure. Thirty-two anaesthetized, paralysed adult patients were randomly allocated to receive either a size 4 LMA or PLMA. Microchip sensors were attached at locations corresponding to: (a) base of tongue; (b) distal oropharynx; (c) hypopharynx; (d) lateral pharynx; (e) posterior pharynx; and (f) pyriform fossa. In vitro and in vivo intracuff pressures, OLP and directly measured mucosal pressure were documented at zero volume and after each 10 mi up to 40 mi. Directly measured mucosal pressure was similar between devices for a given cuff volume, but was lower for the PLMA for a given OLP. Directly measured mucosal pressure was highest in the distal oropharynx for both devices, but rarely (<5%) exceeded 35 cm H2O, OLP was higher for the PLMA at all cuff volumes. Directly measured mucosal pressure was usually lower than OLP for both devices, and there was a positive correlation between directly measured mucosal pressure and OLP. Cuff volume, in vivo intracuff pressure and calculated mucosal pressure were poor to moderate predictors of directly measured mucosal pressure for the LMA and PLMA. We conclude that the PLMA forms a better seal than the IMA without an increase in directly measured mucosal pressure.
引用
收藏
页码:262 / 266
页数:5
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1986, The design and analysis of clinical experiments
[2]   Appropriate size and inflation of the laryngeal mask airway [J].
Asai, T ;
Howell, TK ;
Koga, K ;
Morris, S .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1998, 80 (04) :470-474
[3]  
BRIMACOMBE J, 1993, ANESTH ANALG, V76, P457
[4]   A comparison of pharyngeal mucosal pressure and airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized adult patients [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 1998, 87 (06) :1379-1382
[5]   Direct measurement of mucosal pressures exerted by cuff and non-cuff portions of tracheal tubes with different cuff volumes and head and neck positions [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C ;
Giampalmo, M ;
Sparr, HJ ;
Berry, A .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1999, 82 (05) :708-711
[6]   Pharyngeal mucosal pressure and perfusion -: A fiberoptic evaluation of the posterior pharynx in anesthetized adult patients with a modified cuffed oropharyngeal airway [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C ;
Pühringer, F .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1999, 91 (06) :1661-1665
[7]   Laryngeal mask airway size selection in males and females: ease of insertion, oropharyngeal leak pressure, pharyngeal mucosal pressures and anatomical position [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1999, 82 (05) :703-707
[8]  
Brimacombe JR, 1999, LARYNGEAL MASK INSTR
[9]   A prospective evaluation of clinical tests for placement of laryngeal mask airways [J].
Joshi, S ;
Sciacca, RR ;
Solanki, DR ;
Young, WL ;
Mathru, MM .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1998, 89 (05) :1141-1146
[10]   Comparison of four methods for assessing airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in adult patients [J].
Keller, C ;
Brimacombe, JR ;
Keller, K ;
Morris, R .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1999, 82 (02) :286-287