Comparison of I-gel and LMA-Supreme Laryngeal Mask Airway in Laparoscopic Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Study

Abstract Objective An adequate intracuff pressure is important to ensure sufficient sealing function when using supraglottic airway devices to protect the airway from secretions and achieve adequate positive pressure ventilation. The aim of this study is to analyze a feasible and effective alternative Ambu AuraFlex intracuff pressure in child's laparoscopic surgery. Study Design Seventy-two children were included in this study. After insertion of the laryngeal mask airway AuraFlex, oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) was measured at intracuff pressures of 10, 30, and 60-cmH2O according to one of six sequences produced on the basis of 3 × 6 Williams crossover design. During the intraoperative period, AuraFlex was maintained using the last intracuff pressure of the allocated sequence. Oropharyngeal leak pressure, peak airway pressure, the fiberoptic view, mucosal change, and complications were assessed at three intracuff pressures. Results The OLP at the intracuff pressure of 10 cmH2O was significantly lower than that of 30 cmH2O (2# 18.1 ± 1.5 vs. 19.5 ± 1.4 cmH2O, p = 0.001; 2.5# 17.7 ± 1.2 vs. 20.2 ± 1.4, p = 0.001) and 60 cmH2O (2# 18.1 ± 1.5 vs. 20.0 ± 1.3 cmH2O, p = 0.002; 2.5# 17.7 ± 1.2 vs. 20.8 ± 1.1, p = 0.003). Compared with the peak airway pressure in pre-and postpneumoperitoneum, the OLP was significantly higher. Subgroup analysis showed no differences in mucosal change and complications. Conclusion Intracuff pressures of 30 may be sufficient for the Ambu AuraFlex in child's laparoscopic surgery, and there may be no added benefit of an intracuff pressure of 60 cmH2O, as oropharyngeal leak pressures were similar.

Download Full-text

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

BMC Anesthesiology ◽

10.1186/s12871-019-0915-3 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Ulku Ozgul ◽

Feray Akgul Erdil ◽

Mehmet Ali Erdogan ◽

Zekine Begec ◽

Cemil Colak ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Laryngeal Mask Airway ◽

Success Rate ◽

Primary Outcome ◽

Randomized Study ◽

Peak Inspiratory Pressure ◽

Laryngeal Mask ◽

Tube Placement ◽

Insertion Technique ◽

Digital Technique ◽

Insertion Techniques

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.

Download Full-text