Comparison of the Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway with the Fiberoptic Intubation in Anticipated Difficult Airway Management

2001 ◽  
Vol 94 (6) ◽  
pp. 968-972 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivier Langeron ◽  
François Semjen ◽  
Jean-Louis Bourgain ◽  
Alain Marsac ◽  
Anne-Marie Cros

Background The intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA; Fastrach; Laryngeal Mask Company, Henley-on-Thames, UK) may provide an alternative technique to fiberoptic intubation (FIB) to facilitate the management of the anticipated difficult airway. The authors therefore compared the effectiveness of the ILMA with FIB in patients with anticipated difficult intubation. Methods One hundred patients, with at least one difficult intubation criteria (Mallampati class III or IV, thyromental distance < 65 mm, interincisor distance < 35 mm) were enrolled (FIB group, n = 49; ILMA group, n = 51) in this prospective randomized study. Anesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with alfentanil and propofol after an efficient mask ventilation has been demonstrated. The success of the technique (within three attempts), the number of attempts, duration of the successful attempt, and adverse events (oxygen saturation < 90%, bleeding) were recorded. Results The rate of successful tracheal intubation with ILMA was 94% and comparable with FIB (92%). The number of attempts and the time to succeed were not significantly different between groups. In case of failure of the first technique, the alternative technique always succeeded. Failures in FIB group were related to oxygen desaturation (oxygen saturation < 90%) and bleeding, and to previous cervical radiotherapy in the ILMA group. Adverse events occurred significantly more frequently in FIB group than in ILMA group (18 vs. 0%, P < 0.05). Conclusion The authors obtained a high success rate and comparable duration of tracheal intubation with ILMA and FIB techniques. In patients with previous cervical radiotherapy, the use of ILMA cannot be recommended. Nevertheless, the use of the ILMA was associated with fewer adverse events.

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 1617-1623 ◽  
Author(s):  
Semih ÖZDİL ◽  
Zehra İpek ARSLAN AYDIN ◽  
Zehra Nur BAYKARA ◽  
Kamil TOKER ◽  
Zeynep Mine SOLAK

2021 ◽  
pp. 60-62
Author(s):  
Manjunath Prabhu ◽  
Shwethapriya Rao ◽  
Arushi Gupta

Introduction: Airway management with unstable cervical spine is a major challenge to anesthetist. Conventional direct laryngoscopy causes substantial movement of cervical spine and can cause neurological decit. Newer devices like Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway(ILMA) and Trachlight avoid cervical spine movement. To compare rate of successful tracheal Aim: intubation with Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway™ with Trachlight® in anaesthetised and paralysed adults with manual in line stabilization Method and Materials: 50 patients were included in the study and allocated in two groups. In the ILMA group ,patients were ventilated and then intubated through the ILma. IN the Trachlight group, patients were intubated using trachlight. Success rate , time taken for intubation and post operative sore throat and hoarseness of voice were compared between the two groups. Results: In the ILMA group,21 patients could be adequately ventilated in the rst attempt and 4 in second attempt. 12 patients could be successfully intubated. 9 patients could be intubated in the rst attempt and 3 patients in second attempt. In the Trachlight , 24 patients could be intubated in the rst attempt and one patient in second attempt. Intubation time was 14.08 ± 2.23 seconds in the ILMA group whereas in Trachlight group it was 26.48 ± 9.13 seconds(p value of <0.0001) In healthy anaesthetized,paralysed adults with manual in line stabiliz Conclusion: ation Trachlight assistance at tracheal intubation provides high rst attempt success.ILMA is an effective ventilation device, but an unacceptably high failure rate at blind tracheal intubation.


2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 551-569 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Caponas

The Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway (ILMA) was introduced into clinical practice in 1997 following numerous clinical trials involving 1110 patients. The success rate of blind intubation via the device after two attempts is 88% in “routine” cases. Successful intubation in a variety of difficult airway scenarios, including awake intubation, has been described, with the overall success rate in the 377 patients reported being approximately 98%. The use of the ILMA by the novice operator has also been investigated with conflicting reports as to its suitability for emergency intubation in this setting.Blind versus visualized intubation techniques have also been investigated. These techniques may provide some benefits in improved safety and success rates, although the evidence is not definitive. The use of a visualizing technique is recommended, especially whilst experience with intubation via the ILMA is being gained. The risk of oesophageal intubation is reported as 5% and one death has been described secondary to the complications of oesophageal perforation during blind intubation. Morbidity described with the use of the ILMA includes sore throat, hoarse voice and epiglottic oedema. Haemodynamic changes associated with intubation via the ILMA are of minimal clinical consequence.The ILMA is a valuable adjunct to the airway management armamentarium, especially in cases of difficult airway management. Success with the device is more likely if the head of the patient is maintained in the neutral position, when the operator has practised at least 20 previous insertions and when the accompanying lubricated armoured tube is used.


2012 ◽  
Vol 116 (6) ◽  
pp. 1210-1216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte V. Rosenstock ◽  
Bente Thøgersen ◽  
Arash Afshari ◽  
Anne-Lise Christensen ◽  
Claus Eriksen ◽  
...  

Background Awake flexible fiberoptic intubation (FFI) is the gold standard for management of anticipated difficult tracheal intubation. The purpose of this study was to compare awake FFI to awake McGrath® video laryngoscope, (MVL), (Aircraft Medical, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom) intubation in patients with an anticipated difficult intubation. The authors examined the hypothesis that MVL intubation would be faster than FFI. Methods Ninety-three adult patients with anticipated difficult intubation were randomly allocated to awake FFI or awake MVL, patients were given glycopyrrolate, nasal oxygen, topical lidocaine orally, and a transtracheal injection of 100 mg lidocaine. Remifentanil infusion was administered intravenously to a Ramsay sedation score of 2-4. Time to tracheal intubation was recorded by independent assessors. The authors also recorded intubation success on the first attempt, investigators' evaluation of ease of the technique, and patients reported intubation-discomfort evaluated on a visual analog scale. Results Eighty-four patients were eligible for analysis. Time to tracheal intubation was median [interquartile range, IQR] 80 s [IQR 58-117] with FFI and 62 s [IQR 55-109] with MVL (P = 0.17). Intubation success on the first attempt was 79% versus 71% for FFI and MVL, respectively. The median visual analog scale score for ease of intubation was 2 (IQR 1-4) versus 1 (IQR 1-6) for FFI and MVL, respectively. The median visual analog scale score for patients' assessment of discomfort for both techniques was 2, FFI (IQR 0-3), MVL (IQR 0-4). Conclusions The authors found no difference in time to tracheal intubation between awake FFI and awake MVL intubation performed by experienced anesthesiologists in patients with anticipated difficult airway.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document