Dataset Information

The use of flexible laryngeal mask airway for Adenoidectomies: An experience of 814Paediatric patients.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To assess flexible laryngeal mask airway (F-LMA) use during pediatric adenoidectomies in terms of patient safety, comfort, complication rates and surgeon satisfaction levels. METHODS:Patients who had undergone an elective adenoidectomy after receiving general anesthesia using F-LMA from June 2012 to November 2015 were included. Patients' demographics and the incidence of perioperative complications were investigated. The surgeon's satisfaction level was also evaluated by questionnaire. RESULTS:Eight hundred fourteen patient were included in the study. Conversion from F-LMA to an endotracheal tube was carried out in two patients (0.2%). Airway complications were identified in two patients. The mean duration of stay in the postoperative anesthesia care unit was 17 minutes. All patients were discharged the same day. According to the otolaryngologists F-LMA applications provide a significant reduction in the processing time (100%), postoperative patient comfort is better than when using endotracheal intubation (83.3%) and the consensus was that there should be a complete continuation of the use of the F-LMA (100%) in subsequent adenoidectomies. CONCLUSION:Our data show that the use of F-LMA for pediatric adenoidectomies has well tolerability profile and resulted in a lower incidence of complications. We think that the use of F-LMA for pediatric adenoidectomy is safer, simpler and speeder method.

SUBMITTER: Ozmete O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5648946 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul-Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The use of flexible laryngeal mask airway for Adenoidectomies: An experience of 814Paediatric patients.

Ozmete Ozlem O Sener Mesut M Caliskan Esra E Kipri Meltem M Aribogan Anis A

Pakistan journal of medical sciences 20170701 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess flexible laryngeal mask airway (F-LMA) use during pediatric adenoidectomies in terms of patient safety, comfort, complication rates and surgeon satisfaction levels.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients who had undergone an elective adenoidectomy after receiving general anesthesia using F-LMA from June 2012 to November 2015 were included. Patients' demographics and the incidence of perioperative complications were investigated. The surgeon's satisfaction level was also evaluated by ...[more]

PMID: 29067047

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:ObjectivesAlthough the flexible laryngeal mask airway (FLMA) provides considerable advantages in head and neck procedures, little is known about its safety and efficacy in functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the success rate of FLMA and relevant airway complications in FESS under general anaesthesia.MethodsA retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent FESS for chronic rhinosinusitis was performed from 2015 to 2019. All patients scheduled for FLMA ventilation were identified. Patient characteristics, length of the surgery, FLMA size, failed FLMA cases requiring endotracheal intubation, immediate adverse airway events and delayed airway injuries were recorded. The primary outcomes included the FLMA success rate, which was defined as primary success after induction and final success after the whole surgical procedure. The secondary outcomes were specific clinical factors associated with FLMA failure and airway complications related to FLMA usage.ResultsOf the 6661 patients included in our study, primary success was achieved in 6572 (98.7%), and final success was achieved in 6512 (97.8%). Failure occurred in 89 patients (1.3%) during induction, in 14 (0.2%) during surgical preparation and in 46 (0.7%) during the intraoperative procedure. All patients with failed FLMA ventilation were successfully switched to endotracheal intubation. Male sex, advanced age, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists grade (ASA) and higher body mass index (BMI) were independent risk factors associated with failed FLMA. Immediate adverse respiratory events were observed in 0.85% of the patients, and delayed airway injuries associated with use of FLMA were observed in 0.07%.ConclusionThis retrospective study demonstrates a high success rate for FLMA (97.8% in 6661 patients undergoing FESS). Adverse airway events and injuries associated with FLMA are rare, but clinicians should remain vigilant so that early diagnosis and prompt treatment can be provided.

Project description:Background and aimsThe Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) Protector™ is one of the latest introduced supraglottic airway devices. It provides access and functional separation of the respiratory and digestive tracts. Compared to the LMA Supreme™, it has two digestive ports, one to provide suction in the pharyngeal region and one for gastric tube insertion. High oropharyngeal leak pressure is a marker for safe ventilation when using LMA devices. We hypothesized that oropharyngeal leak pressure of the LMA Protector™ is 5 cm H2O higher than the oropharyngeal leak pressure of the LMA Supreme™ at various cuff volumes. Secondary outcome measures were ease of insertion of both masks, fiberoptic confirmation of correct positioning, failures of insertion, presence of blood staining, sore throat, presence of air leak and insertion time.Material and methodsAmerican Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-III patients aged >18 years, scheduled for elective minor ambulatory surgery under general anesthesia with a LMA were included. Patients were randomized in the LMA Protector™ or LMA Supreme™ group based on a computer-generated random sequence table. After general anesthesia induction, oropharyngeal leak pressures were measured.ResultsOropharyngeal leak pressures were significantly higher (P < 0.0001) for LMA Protector™ compared to LMA Supreme™ at different cuff volumes and a cuff pressure of 65 cm H2O. Insertion time was significantly higher for the LMA Protector™ (29 sec) [interquartile range (IQR) 23, 35] compared to the LMA Supreme™ (19 sec) (IQR 16, 22) (P < 0.0001). There were no statistically significant differences in ease of insertion (number of attempts for succesful positioning), failures of insertion, presence of blood staining, sore throat or presence of air leak.ConclusionOropharyngeal leak pressures were consistently higher (>5 cm H2O) for LMA Protector™ compared to LMA Supreme™. LMA Protector™, therefore, allows effective ventilation at higher airway pressures than LMA Supreme™.Trial registrationhttp://clinicaltrials.gov.NCT03462550.

Project description:BackgroundDesflurane's short emergence time supports fast track anaesthesia. Data on the rate of upper airway complications and emergence time when desflurane is used with laryngeal mask airway (LMA) are controversial and limited.ObjectivesTo compare recovery time variables and the rates of upper airway adverse events in patients with an LMA undergoing general surgery with desflurane, sevoflurane, isoflurane or propofol anaesthesia.DesignA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).Data sourcesA systematic search for eligible RCTs in Embase (Elsevier) and in PubMed (National Library of Medicine) databases up to September 2013.Eligibility criteriaRCTs investigating the rates of cough overall, cough at emergence, laryngospasm, time to eye opening, time to removal of the LMA, time to respond to command and time to state date of birth in patients with an LMA, during emergence from desflurane, sevoflurane, isoflurane or propofol anaesthesia.ResultsThirteen RCTs were included and analysed. We found a strong interstudy variability. There was no difference in the rates of upper airway events between desflurane and sevoflurane or between desflurane and a control group consisting of all the other anaesthetics combined. Comparing desflurane (n = 284) with all other anaesthetic groups (n = 313), the risk ratio [95% confidence interval (95% CI)] was 1.12 (0.63 to 2.02, P = 0.70). Cough at emergence was only measured in patients receiving desflurane (n = 148) and sevoflurane (n = 146): the risk ratio (95% CI) was 1.49 (0.55 to 4.02, P = 0.43). Laryngospasm was rare and there was no significant difference in its incidence when desflurane (n = 262) was compared with all other anaesthetics combined (n = 289; risk ratio 1.03; 95% CI 0.33 to 3.20, P = 0.96). The times of all emergence variables were significantly faster in the desflurane group than in all other groups.ConclusionWhen using an LMA, upper airway adverse reactions in association with desflurane anaesthesia were no different from those noted with sevoflurane, isoflurane or propofol anaesthesia. Emergence from general anaesthesia with desflurane is significantly faster than all the other anaesthetics. Due to interstudy variations and the small size of the trials, further large-scale, multicentre studies are required to confirm or refute the results of this meta-analysis.

Project description:Laryngeal mask airway (LMA) may be considered by health caregivers of level I-II hospitals for neonatal resuscitation and stabilization before and during interhospital care, but literature provides little information on this aspect. This study reviewed the use of LMA during stabilization and transport in a large series of neonates. This is a retrospective study evaluating the use of LMA in infants who underwent emergency transport by the Eastern Veneto Neonatal Emergency Transport Service between January 2003 and December 2021. All data were obtained from transport registry, transport forms, and hospital charts. In total, 64/3252 transferred neonates (2%) received positive pressure ventilation with an LMA, with increasing trend over time (p = 0.001). Most of these neonates were transferred after birth (97%), due to a respiratory or neurologic disease (95%). LMA was used before the transport (n = 60), during the transport (n = 1), or both (n = 3). No device-related adverse effects were recorded. Sixty-one neonates (95%) survived and were discharged/transferred from the receiving center.ConclusionIn a large series of transferred neonates, LMA use during stabilization and transport was rare but increasing over time, and showed some heterogeneity among referring centers. In our series, LMA was safe and lifesaving in "cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate" situations. Future prospective, multicenter research may provide detailed insights on LMA use in neonates needing postnatal transport.What is known• A supraglottic airway device may be used as an alternative to face mask and endotracheal tube during neonatal resuscitation. • The laryngeal mask may be considered by health caregivers of low-level hospitals with limited exposure on airway management, but literature provides little information on this aspect.What is new• In a large series of transferred neonates, laryngeal mask use was rare but increasing over time, and showed some heterogeneity among referring centers. • The laryngeal mask was safe and lifesaving in "cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate" situations.

Dataset Information

The use of flexible laryngeal mask airway for Adenoidectomies: An experience of 814Paediatric patients.

Publications

The use of flexible laryngeal mask airway for Adenoidectomies: An experience of 814Paediatric patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets