Randomized crossover comparison of the ProSeal with the classic laryngeal mask airway in unparalysed anaesthetized patients

被引:117
作者
Cook, TM
Nolan, JP
Verghese, C
Strube, PJ
Lees, M
Millar, JM
Baskett, PJF
机构
[1] Royal United Hosp, Bath BA1 3NG, Avon, England
[2] Royal Berkshire Hosp, Reading RG1 5AN, Berks, England
[3] Wycombe Gen Hosp, High Wycombe HP11 2TT, Bucks, England
[4] Univ London Kings Coll, London SE5 9SR, England
[5] Oxford Radcliffe Hosp Trust, Oxford OX3 9DU, England
[6] Frenchay Hosp, Bristol BS16 1LE, Avon, England
关键词
equipment; airway; masks anaesthesia; larynx;
D O I
10.1093/bja/88.4.527
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Background. The ProSeal is a wire-reinforced laryngeal mask airway with an additional drain tube that leads to the distal tip of the laryngeal cuff. The design should improve the seal with the larynx. Methods. The ProSeal and classic laryngeal mask airways were compared in 180 patients in a randomized crossover study. Patients were anaesthetized without neuromuscular blocking drugs. Results. The ProSeal took more time and more attempts to insert successfully than the classic laryngeal mask airway. Insertion was successful on the first attempt in 81% of cases with the ProSeal and 90% with the classic laryngeal mask airway. The ProSeal required more air to achieve an intracuff pressure of 60 cm H2O (6 ml more for size 4 and 12 ml more for size 5). Laryngeal seal pressure was better with the ProSeal than the classic laryngeal mask airway. Median seal pressure was 29 cm H2O with the ProSeal and 18 cm H2O with the classic laryngeal mask airway. Laryngeal seal pressure was greater than 20 cm H2O in 87% of patients with the ProSeal and 41% with the classic laryngeal mask airway. Laryngeal seal pressure was greater than 40 cm H2O in 21% of patients with the ProSeal and in none of the patients with the classic laryngeal mask. Once placed, the ProSeal remained a stable and effective airway. Gastric tube insertion through the drain tube was attempted in 147 cases and was successful in 135 (92%). Conclusion. The ProSeal is more difficult to insert than the classic laryngeal mask airway but allows positive pressure ventilation more reliably than the classic laryngeal mask airway.
引用
收藏
页码:527 / 533
页数:7
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]   RISK OF ASPIRATION WITH THE LARYNGEAL MASK [J].
AKHTAR, TM ;
STREET, MK .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1994, 72 (04) :447-450
[2]  
*AM HEART ASS COLL, 2000, RESUSCITATION, V46, P115
[3]  
[Anonymous], INTAVENT LARYNGEAL M
[4]  
ARONSIO EM, 1994, ANAESTHESIA, P635
[5]   Laryngeal mask airway and the incidence of regurgitation during gynecological laparoscopies [J].
Bapat, PP ;
Verghese, C .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 1997, 85 (01) :139-143
[6]   REGURGITATION OF GASTRIC CONTENTS DURING GENERAL-ANESTHESIA USING THE LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY [J].
BARKER, P ;
LANGTON, JA ;
MURPHY, PJ ;
ROWBOTHAM, DJ .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1992, 69 (03) :314-315
[7]   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
[8]  
BRAIN AIJ, 2001, LMA PROSEAL INSTRUCT
[9]   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
[10]   THE INCIDENCE OF ASPIRATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY - A METAANALYSIS OF PUBLISHED LITERATURE [J].
BRIMACOMBE, JR ;
BERRY, A .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, 1995, 7 (04) :297-305