scholarly journals WITHDRAWN: Fiber-optic evaluation of laryngeal mask airway position during controlled mechanical ventilation: Time effect

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hosam M. Atef ◽  
Mohamed T. EL Tabakh
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Laryngeal Mask Airway ◽  
Fiber Optic ◽  
Time Effect ◽  
Laryngeal Mask ◽  
Ventilation Time ◽  
Controlled Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation Time

scholarly journals Unusual pericuff leak around proseal-laryngeal mask airway corrected by clamping gastric drain port: A case report

2021 ◽  
pp. 345-347
Author(s):  
Mohd. Mustahsin ◽  
Debesh Bhoi
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Laryngeal Mask Airway ◽  
Laryngeal Mask ◽  
Drain Tube ◽  
Air Leak ◽  
Successful Management ◽  
Air Leaks ◽  
Gastric Contents ◽  
Controlled Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Ryle’S Tube

ProSealTM-Laryngeal Mask Airway (PLMA) (Laryngeal Mask Company, Henley-on Thames, UK) is commonly used for securing the airway with an added advantage over classic LMA as its gastric drain tube allows the insertion of Ryle’s tube and suctioning of gastric contents. The ProSeal LMA is designed in such a way that it allows controlled mechanical ventilation. During controlled mechanical ventilation, air leaks can occur because of positive airway pressures. Air leaks from the gastric drain port are almost always due to the malposition of PLMA. Here, we report a case of air leak from gastric drain port despite correctly placed PLMA and its successful management without removing the device.

scholarly journals The Association of Fever with Total Mechanical Ventilation Time in Critically Ill Patients

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (12) ◽  
pp. 2033 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong Won Park ◽  
Moritoki Egi ◽  
Masaji Nishimura ◽  
Youjin Chang ◽  
Gee Young Suh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Ventilation Time ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation Time

Laryngeal Mask Airway for Surfactant Administration Versus Standard Treatment Methods in Preterm Neonates with Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roqaia Ayesh Al Ali ◽  
Bishal Gautam ◽  
Michael R. Miller ◽  
Sherry Coulson ◽  
Doris Yuen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Laryngeal Mask Airway ◽  
Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress ◽  
Risk Ratio ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Laryngeal Mask

Objective Laryngeal mask airway (LMA) has emerged as an alternative surfactant delivery method. The effectiveness of this method for the delivery of surfactant is uncertain. A meta-analysis of randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing LMA with standard methods of surfactant delivery for the outcomes of surfactant dose repetition, oxygen requirement, mechanical ventilation, intubation, mortality, bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), and pneumothorax. Study Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. Homogeneity between studies was analyzed by using I2 statistics. Risk ratio or mean difference of outcomes was assessed from random effects models. Subgroup analyses were conducted when necessary. Data sources are as follows: Ovid Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials from inception till December 2018, bibliographies of identified reviews and trial registries for ongoing studies. RCTs comparing short-term respiratory outcomes in neonates with respiratory distress syndrome who were administered surfactant through an LMA versus standard method of care. Results Six RCTs were identified, enrolling a total of 357 infants. Administering surfactant via LMA was associated with decreased FiO2 requirement (mean difference = 1.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: −6.01 to 9.66), decreased intubation (risk ratio [RR] = 0.17; 95% CI: 0.05–0.57), and decreased mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.44; 95% CI: 0.31–0.61). There were no significant differences between groups for death, BPD, or pneumothorax. Conclusion LMA might be an effective alternative method of surfactant delivery; however, further high-quality RCTs with larger sample size and including extreme preterm infants are needed to establish LMA as an alternative technique for surfactant delivery. Key Points

scholarly journals Closed-Loop Versus Conventional Mechanical Ventilation in COVID-19 ARDS

2021 ◽  
pp. 088506662110241
Author(s):  
Pedro David Wendel Garcia ◽  
Daniel Andrea Hofmaenner ◽  
Silvio D. Brugger ◽  
Claudio T. Acevedo ◽  
Jan Bartussek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Closed Loop ◽  
Conventional Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Protective Ventilation ◽  
Lung Protective Ventilation ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Ventilation Time ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation Time

Background: Lung-protective ventilation is key in bridging patients suffering from COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) to recovery. However, resource and personnel limitations during pandemics complicate the implementation of lung-protective protocols. Automated ventilation modes may prove decisive in these settings enabling higher degrees of lung-protective ventilation than conventional modes. Method: Prospective study at a Swiss university hospital. Critically ill, mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS patients were allocated, by study-blinded coordinating staff, to either closed-loop or conventional mechanical ventilation, based on mechanical ventilator availability. Primary outcome was the overall achieved percentage of lung-protective ventilation in closed-loop versus conventional mechanical ventilation, assessed minute-by-minute, during the initial 7 days and overall mechanical ventilation time. Lung-protective ventilation was defined as the combined target of tidal volume <8 ml per kg of ideal body weight, dynamic driving pressure <15 cmH2O, peak pressure <30 cmH2O, peripheral oxygen saturation ≥88% and dynamic mechanical power <17 J/min. Results: Forty COVID-19 ARDS patients, accounting for 1,048,630 minutes (728 days) of cumulative mechanical ventilation, allocated to either closed-loop (n = 23) or conventional ventilation (n = 17), presenting with a median paO2/ FiO2 ratio of 92 [72-147] mmHg and a static compliance of 18 [11-25] ml/cmH2O, were mechanically ventilated for 11 [4-25] days and had a 28-day mortality rate of 20%. During the initial 7 days of mechanical ventilation, patients in the closed-loop group were ventilated lung-protectively for 65% of the time versus 38% in the conventional group (Odds Ratio, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.76-1.82; P < 0.001) and for 45% versus 33% of overall mechanical ventilation time (Odds Ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.21-1.23; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Among critically ill, mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS patients during an early highpoint of the pandemic, mechanical ventilation using a closed-loop mode was associated with a higher degree of lung-protective ventilation than was conventional mechanical ventilation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document