scholarly journals Comparison of videolaryngoscope-guided versus standard digital insertion techniques of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway: a prospective randomized study

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulku Ozgul ◽  
Feray Akgul Erdil ◽  
Mehmet Ali Erdogan ◽  
Zekine Begec ◽  
Cemil Colak ◽  
...  

Abstract Background This study were designed to investigate the usefulness of the videolaryngoscope-guided insertion technique compared with the standard digital technique for the insertion success rate and insertion conditions of the Proseal™ laryngeal mask airway (PLMA). Methods Prospective, one hundred and nineteen patients (ASA I–II, aged 18–65 yr) were randomly divided for PLMA insertion using the videolaryngoscope-guided technique or the standard digital technique. The PLMA was inserted according to the manufacturer’s instructions in the standard digital technique group. The videolaryngoscope-guided technique was performed a C-MAC® videolaryngoscope with D-Blade, under gentle videolaryngoscope guidance, the epiglottis was lifted, and the PLMA was advanced until the tip of the distal cuff reached the oesophagus inlet. The number of insertion attempts, insertion time, oropharyngeal leak pressure, leak volume, fiberoptic bronchoscopic view, peak inspiratory pressure, ease of gastric tube placement, hemodynamic changes, visible blood on PLMA and postoperative airway morbidity were recorded. Results The first-attempt success rate (the primary outcome) was higher in the videolaryngoscope-guided technique than in the standard digital technique (p = 0.029). The effect size values with 95% confidence interval were 0.19 (0.01–0.36) for the first and second attempts, 0.09 (− 0.08–0.27) for the first and third attempts, and not computed for the second and third attempts by the groups, respectively. Conclusion Videolaryngoscope-guided insertion technique can be a help in case of difficult positioning of a PLMA and can improve the PLMA performance in some conditions. We suggest that the videolaryngoscope-guided technique may be a useful technique if the digital technique fails. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03852589 date of registration: February 22th 2019.

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.


2006 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 398-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto García-Aguado ◽  
Juan Viñoles ◽  
Joseph Brimacombe ◽  
Miguel Vivó ◽  
Rosario López-Estudillo ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document