Proseal Lma Thesis Statements


The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) ProSeal is most commonly used supraglottic airway device; it is routinely inserted by blind technique. Although blind insertion technique is most widely used, there are many techniques which are available such as priming the drain tube with a guiding instrument such as a suction catheter, a gum elastic bougie, a Flexi-Slip Stylet, direct laryngoscopy, and even a fiber-optic bronchoscope (FOB). The present study was undertaken to compare and assess the placement of LMA ProSeal using blind versus direct laryngoscopy techniques using FOB.A prospective randomized comparative study of 110 patients divided into two groups of 55 each as Group I (blind insertion) and Group II (direct laryngoscopic insertion) after satisfying the inclusion criteria. The anatomical position was assessed by flexible FOB and evaluated based on fiber-optic scoring system.In the present study, demographic characteristics, vital parameters, Mallampati score, and Wilson's score were comparable in both the groups (P > 0.05). The fiber-optic score (FOS) 1 in Group II was 78.18% compared to 60% in Group I, but the difference was statistically not significant (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the mean FOS in Group II was slightly high (3.84 ± 0.87) compared to Group II (1.62 ± 0.87), but the difference was statistically not significant (P > 0.05). Further hemodynamic parameters (P > 0.05) and complications (P > 0.05) were comparable in both the groups.The LMA placement scoring was similar in both blind and direct laryngoscopic techniques. Blind insertion technique is a simpler, easier, and has stood the test of time.

1. Rushman GB, Davies NJ, Cashman JN. Intubation and ventilation. In: Rushman GB, Davies NJ, Cashman JN, editors. Lee's Synopsis of Anaesthesia. Great Britain: MPG; 1999. pp. 246–53.

2. Miller RD, Eriksson LI, Fleisher LA, Wiener-Kronish JP, Young WL. Miller's Anesthesia. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier; 2015. pp. 1661–4.

3. Mark DA. Protection from aspiration with the LMA-ProSeal after vomiting: A case report. Can J Anaesth. 2003;50:78–80.[PubMed]

4. Brain AI, Verghese C, Strube PJ. The LMA ‘ProSeal’ – A laryngeal mask with an oesophageal vent. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84:650–4.[PubMed]

5. Hohlrieder M, Brimacombe J, von Goedecke A, Keller C. Postoperative nausea, vomiting, airway morbidity, and analgesic requirements are lower for the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway than the tracheal tube in females undergoing breast and gynaecological surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2007;99:576–80.[PubMed]

6. Brain AI, Verghese C, Addy EV, Kapila A. The intubating laryngeal mask. I: Development of a new device for intubation of the trachea. Br J Anaesth. 1997;79:699–703.[PubMed]

7. Brimacombe J, Keller C, Morris R, Mecklem D. A comparison of the disposable versus the reusable laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed adult patients. Anesth Analg. 1998;87:921–4.[PubMed]

8. The Laryngeal Mask Company Ltd. LMATM: LMA SupremeTM. Instruction Manual. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Intavent Orthofix Ltd; 2008.

9. LMA ProSeal instruction manual. Maidenhead: Intavent Orthofix; 2001.

10. Hosten T, Yildiz TS, Kus A, Solak M, Toker K. Comparison of supreme laryngeal mask airway and ProSeal laryngeal mask airway during cholecystectomy. Balkan Med J. 2012;29:314–9.[PMC free article][PubMed]

11. Seet E, Rajeev S, Firoz T, Yousaf F, Wong J, Wong DT, et al. Safety and efficacy of laryngeal mask airway supreme versus laryngeal mask airway ProSeal: A randomized controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2010;27:602–7.[PubMed]

12. Keller C, Brimacombe JR, Keller K, Morris R. Comparison of four methods for assessing airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in adult patients. Br J Anaesth. 1999;82:286–7.[PubMed]

13. Eschertzhuber S, Brimacombe J, Hohlrieder M, Keller C. The laryngeal mask airway Supreme – A single use laryngeal mask airway with an oesophageal vent. A randomised, cross-over study with the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal in paralysed, anaesthetised patients. Anaesthesia. 2009;64:79–83.[PubMed]

14. Lee AK, Tey JB, Lim Y, Sia AT. Comparison of the single-use LMA supreme with the reusable ProSeal LMA for anaesthesia in gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2009;37:815–9.[PubMed]

15. Brimacombe JR, Brain AI, Berry AM. The Laryngeal Mask Airway: A Review and Practical Guide. London: WB. Saunders Company Ltd; 1997.

16. Sharma B, Gupta R, Sehgal R, Koul A, Sood J. ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway cuff pressure changes with and without use of nitrous oxide during laparoscopic surgery. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2013;29:47–51.[PMC free article][PubMed]

17. Brimacombe J, Keller C, Berry A. Assessing ProSeal laryngeal mask positioning: Suprasternal notch test. Anesth Analg. 2002;94:1375.[PubMed]

18. Rowley E, Dingwall R. The use of single-use devices in anaesthesia: Balancing the risks to patient safety. Anaesthesia. 2007;62:569–74.[PubMed]

0 Thoughts to “Proseal Lma Thesis Statements

Leave a comment

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *