Dataset Information

Head elevation by 3 vs. 6 cm in ProSeal laryngeal mask airway insertion: a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: The sniffing position (neck flexion by head elevation and head extension) is commonly used for insertion of a laryngeal mask airway. However, the appropriate degrees of head elevation and head extension are unclear. In the present study, the success rate of ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway (LMA ProSeal) insertion using two degrees of head elevation was evaluated.This prospective randomized, controlled study included 80 adult patients aged 18 to 90 years. In the 3 cm (n?=?40) and 6 cm (n?=?40) groups, the LMA ProSeal was inserted while the head was elevated 3 cm and 6 cm, respectively, using a pillow of the corresponding height. The success rate, and incidence of blood staining on cuff, sore throat and hoarseness were assessed. The alignments of laryngeal and oral axes were also evaluated.The first attempt success rate was higher in the 3 cm than the 6 cm group (87 % vs. 60 %, P?=?0.014). In 86 % of patients in the 6 cm group and 50 % of patients in the 3 cm group in whom the second attempt failed, the third insertion attempt was successful by using a pillow height of the opposite group. The alignments of the two axes were not different between the two groups (P?>?0.05).The first attempt success rate of ProSeal laryngeal mask insertion was higher with 3 cm than 6 cm head elevation in adult patients.Identifiers: NCT02058030 (08/05/2015), Unique Protocol ID: phdkim1.

SUBMITTER: Yun MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4974810 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Head elevation by 3 vs. 6 cm in ProSeal laryngeal mask airway insertion: a randomized controlled trial.

Yun Mi-Jung MJ Hwang Jung-Won JW Kim Sung-Hoon SH Hong Hyo-Ju HJ Jeon Young-Tae YT Park Hee-Pyoung HP

BMC anesthesiology 20160805 1

<h4>Background</h4>The sniffing position (neck flexion by head elevation and head extension) is commonly used for insertion of a laryngeal mask airway. However, the appropriate degrees of head elevation and head extension are unclear. In the present study, the success rate of ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway (LMA ProSeal) insertion using two degrees of head elevation was evaluated.<h4>Methods</h4>This prospective randomized, controlled study included 80 adult patients aged 18 to 90 years. In the 3 ...[more]

PMID: 27494933

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundProSeal (PLMA) and Supreme (SLMA) laryngeal mask airways are effective ventilator devices with distinctive designs that may require different anaesthetics for insertion. Sevoflurane induction provides acceptable conditions for laryngeal mask insertion, and remifentanil significantly decreases the minimum alveolar concentration of sevoflurane required for that insertion. The study aimed to evaluate the optimal end-tidal (ET) sevoflurane concentration for successful insertion of PLMA versus SLMA in patients receiving a remifentanil infusion without a neuromuscular blocking agent.MethodsAltogether, 45 patients ASA (American Society Anaesthesiologists) physical status I-II, aged 18-60 years were scheduled for elective ambulatory surgery. Exclusion criteria were a difficult airway, recent respiratory infection, reactive airway, obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome, gastric aspiration's risk factors, pregnancy, and lactation. Patients were randomly allocated to receive the SLMA or the PLMA. Sevoflurane induction with co-administration of remifentanil was performed at an effect-site concentration of 4 ng mL- 1. ET50 was calculated with a modified Dixon's up-and-down method (starting at 2.5% in steps of 0.5%). Predetermined sevoflurane concentration was kept constant during the 10 min before LMA insertion. Patient's response to LMA insertion was classified as "movement" or "no movement". Sevoflurane ET50 was determined as the midpoint concentration of all the independent pairs that manifested crossover from "movement" to "no movement".ResultsThe ET50 sevoflurane concentration co-administered with remifentanil required for PLMA insertion was 1.20 ± 0.41% (95% confidence interval 0.76 to 1.63%). For SLMA insertion, it was 0.55 ± 0.38% (95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.95%) (p = 0.019).ConclusionsThe end-tidal sevoflurane concentration with co-administered remifentanil required to allow insertion of the SLMA was 54% lower than that needed for inserting the PLMA.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03003377. Retrospectively registered. Date of registration: December 28, 2016.

Project description:The Guardian Laryngeal Mask Airway (G-LMA) is a new silicone-based single-use extraglottic device with the drainage port and a cuff pilot valve with pressure indicator. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical performance of this laryngeal mask airway with ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (P-LMA).In this prospective randomized study, we included adult patients with ASA grading I and II scheduled for elective surgery requiring supine position under total intravenous anesthesia. The patients were randomly allocated to two groups, 40 in each. G-LMA and P-LMA were used in groups G and P respectively. The cuff of each device was air inflated to 60 cmH2O. The primary outcome was to compare the airway sealing pressure and the secondary outcome was to compare the efficacy and safety of these two devices with respect to insertion success, insertion time, ease of insertion, volume of air for cuff inflation to 60 cmH2O, intracuff pressure measurement, gastric tube insertion attempt, gastric tube insertion time, Fiberoptic laryngeal view, and postoperative pharyngolaryngeal morbidity.The airway sealing pressure at 60 cmH2O cuff pressure was significantly greater in G-LMA than P-LMA (p?=?0.04).The first successful attempt of both groups were comparable (p?=?1.000). Insertion time was significantly shorter in G-LMA than P-LMA (p?<?0.0001). The first successful attempt for the gastric tube insertion in both groups was comparable (p?=?0.431). Gastric tube insertion time was less in G-LMA than in P-LMA (p?<?0.0001). The volume of air for cuff inflation to 60 cmH2O was more in G-LMA than in P-LMA (<0.0001). The intracuff pressure measurement at 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes were comparable (p?=?0.823, 0.182, 0.870, 0.658).We did not find differences in ease of insertion (p?=?0.60); Fiber-optic positions of airway devices were comparable (p?=?0.83). In addition, blood staining (p?=?1.00), sore throat and dysphagia at 1, 2 and 24 hour (p?=?1.00) were comparable in both groups.The Guardian laryngeal mask airway was associated with high airway sealing pressure with a quicker insertion of the device as well as gastric tube.Clinical Trial.gov Identifier: NCT02063516. Date: June 2013.

Dataset Information

Head elevation by 3 vs. 6 cm in ProSeal laryngeal mask airway insertion: a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Head elevation by 3 vs. 6 cm in ProSeal laryngeal mask airway insertion: a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets