A comparison of seal in seven supraglottic airway devices using a cadaver model of elevated esophageal pressure

被引:83
作者
Bercker, Sven [1 ]
Schmidbauer, Willi [2 ]
Volk, Thomas [4 ,5 ]
Bogusch, Gottfried [3 ]
Bubser, Hans Peter [2 ]
Hensel, Mario [4 ,5 ]
Kerner, Thoralf [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Leipzig Univ Hosp, Dept Anesthesiol & Intens Care Med, Leipzig, Germany
[2] Bundeswehrkrankenhaus, Dept Anesthesiol & Intens Care Med, Berlin, Germany
[3] Charite, Ctr Anat, Berlin, Germany
[4] Campus Virchow Klinikum, Dept Anesthesiol & Intens Care Med, Berlin, Germany
[5] Campus Charite Mitte, Dept Anesthesiol & Intens Care Med, Berlin, Germany
关键词
D O I
10.1213/ane.0b013e3181602ae1
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 [麻醉学];
摘要
BACKGROUND: Supraglottic airway devices are increasingly important in clinical anesthesia and prehospital emergency medicine, but there are only few data to assess the risk for aspiration. We designed this study to compare the seal of seven supraglottic airway devices in a cadaver model of elevated esophageal pressure. METHODS: The classic laryngeal mask airway, laryngeal mask airway ProSeal (TM), intubating laryngeal mask airway Fastrach (TM), laryngeal tube (TM), laryngeal tube LTS II (TM), Combitube (TM), and Easytube (TM) were inserted into unfixed human cadavers with an exposed esophagus that had been connected to a water column of 130 cm height. Slow and fast increases of esophageal pressure were performed and the water pressure at which leakage appeared was registered. RESULTS: The Combitube, Easytube, and intubating laryngeal mask Fastrach withstood the water pressure up to more than 120 cm H2O. The laryngeal mask airway ProSeal, laryngeal tube, and laryngeal tube LTS II were able to block the esophagus until 72-82 cm H2O. The classic laryngeal mask airway showed leakage at 48 cm H2O but only minor leakage was found in the trachea. Devices with an additional esophageal drain tube drained fluid sufficiently without pulmonary aspiration. CONCLUSIONS: Concerning the risk of aspiration, the use of devices with an additional esophageal drainage lumen might be superior for use in patients with an increased risk of aspiration. The Combitube, Easytube, and intubating laryngeal mask Fastrach showed the best capacity to withstand an increase of esophageal pressure.
引用
收藏
页码:445 / 448
页数:4
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]
A comparison of the proseal laryngeal mask airway™, the laryngeal tube S®o and the oesophageal-tracheal combitube™ during routine surgical procedures [J].
Bein, B ;
Carstensen, S ;
Gleim, M ;
Claus, L ;
Tonner, PH ;
Steinfath, M ;
Scholz, J ;
Dörges, V .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2005, 22 (05) :341-346
[2]
Hypopharyngeal seal pressure during projectile vomiting with the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway:: a case report and laboratory study [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA-JOURNAL CANADIEN D ANESTHESIE, 2006, 53 (03) :328-328
[4]
Airway protection with the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C .
ANAESTHESIA AND INTENSIVE CARE, 2001, 29 (03) :288-291
[5]
Evans NR, 2002, CAN J ANAESTH, V49, P413, DOI 10.1007/BF03017332
[6]
EFFICACY OF CRICOID PRESSURE IN PREVENTING REGURGITATION OF GASTRIC CONTENTS [J].
FANNING, GL .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1970, 32 (06) :553-&
[7]
Hagberg CA, 2004, CAN J ANAESTH, V51, P243, DOI 10.1007/BF03019104
[8]
Gastro-oesophageal reflux during day case gynaecological laparoscopy under positive pressure ventilation: laryngeal mask vs. tracheal intubation [J].
Ho, BYM ;
Skinner, HJ ;
Mahajan, RP .
ANAESTHESIA, 1998, 53 (09) :921-924
[9]
Does the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway prevent aspiration of regurgitated fluid? [J].
Keller, C ;
Brimacombe, J ;
Kleinsasser, A ;
Loeckinger, A .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2000, 91 (04) :1017-1020
[10]
Aspiration and the laryngeal mask airway: three cases and a review of the literature [J].
Keller, C ;
Brimacombe, J ;
Bittersohl, J ;
Lirk, P ;
von Goedecke, A .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2004, 93 (04) :579-582