Suction catheter guided insertion of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: Experience by untrained physicians

被引:5
作者
Perilli, Valter [1 ]
Aceto, Paola [1 ]
Sacco, Teresa [1 ]
Martella, Nunzia [1 ]
Cazzato, Maria Teresa [1 ]
Sollazzi, Lilian [1 ]
机构
[1] A Gemelli Hosp, Dept Anesthesiol & Intens Care, Largo A Gemelli 8, I-00168 Rome, Italy
关键词
Digital technique; ProSeal laryngeal mask airway; suction catheter technique; untrained physicians;
D O I
10.4103/0019-5049.126784
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Background: The use of suction catheter (SC) has been shown to improve success rate during ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) insertion in expert users. Aims: The aim of this study was to compare insertion of PLMA performed by untrained physicians using a SC or the digital technique (DT) in anaesthetised non-paralysed patients. Methods: In this prospective randomised double-blind study, conducted in the operating setting, 254 patients (American Society of Anaesthesiologists I-II, aged 18-65 years), undergoing minor surgery were enrolled. Exclusion criteria were body mass index > 35 kg/m(2), laryngeal or oesophageal varices, risk of aspiration or difficult face mask ventilation either referred or suspected (Langeron's criteria >= 2) and modified Mallampati classification score > 2. Participants were randomly allocated to one of the two groups in which PLMA was inserted using DT (DT-group) or SC (SC-group). Statistical Analysis: Chi-square test with Yates' correction, Mann-Whitney U-test or Student's t-test were carried-out as appropriate. Results: The final insertion success rate was greater in SC-groupcompared with DT-group 90.1% (n = 109) versus 74.4% (n = 99) respectively (P = 0.002). Mean airway leak pressure was higher in SC-group compared to DT-group (23.7 +/- 3.9 vs. 21.4 +/- 3.2 respectively; (P = 0.001). There were no differences in insertion time, post-operative airway morbidity and complications. Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that SC-technique improves the success rate of PLMA insertion by untrained physicians.
引用
收藏
页码:25 / 29
页数:5
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]   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
[2]   Gum elastic Bongie-guided insetfion of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway is superior to the digital and introducer tool techniques [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C ;
Judd, DV .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2004, 100 (01) :25-29
[3]   A multicenter study comparing the ProSeal™ and Classic™ laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized, nonparalyzed patients [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C ;
Fullekrug, B ;
Agrò, F ;
Rosenblatt, W ;
Dierdorf, SF ;
de Lucas, EG ;
Capdevilla, X ;
Brimacombe, N .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2002, 96 (02) :289-295
[4]  
Cook TM, 2005, CAN J ANAESTH, V52, P630, DOI 10.1007/BF03015775
[5]  
Garcia-Aguado R, 2006, CAN J ANAESTH, V53, P398, DOI 10.1007/BF03022507
[6]  
Garcia-Aguado R, 2004, Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim, V51, P58
[7]   Use of ProSeal™ Laryngeal Mask Airway in 2114 Adult Patients: A Prospective Study [J].
Goldmann, Kai ;
Hechtfischer, Carolin ;
Malik, Amena ;
Kussin, Andrea ;
Freisburger, Christian .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2008, 107 (06) :1856-1861
[8]   Comparison of bougie-guided insertion of Proseal((TM)) laryngeal mask airway with digital technique in adults [J].
Kuppusamy, Anand ;
Azhar, Naheed .
INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2010, 54 (01) :35-39
[9]   Prediction of difficult mask ventilation [J].
Langeron, O ;
Masso, E ;
Huraux, C ;
Guggiari, M ;
Bianchi, A ;
Coriat, P ;
Riou, B .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2000, 92 (05) :1229-1236
[10]   A systematic review (meta-analysis) of the accuracy of the Mallampati tests to predict the difficult airway [J].
Lee, Anna ;
Fan, Lawrence T. Y. ;
Gin, Tony ;
Karmakar, Manoj K. ;
Kee, Warwick D. Ngan .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2006, 102 (06) :1867-1878