115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16045140)
1. Repeat autoclaving does not remove protein deposits from the classic laryngeal mask airway.
Bannon L; Brimacombe J; Nixon T; Keller C
Eur J Anaesthesiol; 2005 Jul; 22(7):515-7. PubMed ID: 16045140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Routine cleaning and autoclaving does not remove protein deposits from reusable laryngeal mask devices.
Clery G; Brimacombe J; Stone T; Keller C; Curtis S
Anesth Analg; 2003 Oct; 97(4):1189-1191. PubMed ID: 14500180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Supplementary cleaning does not remove protein deposits from re-usable laryngeal mask devices.
Brimacombe J; Stone T; Keller C
Can J Anaesth; 2004 Mar; 51(3):254-7. PubMed ID: 15010409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Potassium permanganate reduces protein contamination of reusable laryngeal mask airways.
Laupu W; Brimacombe J
Anesth Analg; 2004 Aug; 99(2):614-6, table of contents. PubMed ID: 15271751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Protein cross-contamination during batch cleaning and autoclaving of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway.
Richards E; Brimacombe J; Laupau W; Keller C
Anaesthesia; 2006 May; 61(5):431-3. PubMed ID: 16674615
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Autoclaving impairs the connector-tube bond of the laryngeal mask airway but not its airtightness.
Preis C; Hartmann T; Preis I; Wildling E; Gilly H
Br J Anaesth; 1998 Nov; 81(5):795-6. PubMed ID: 10193299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Residual protein contamination of ProSeal laryngeal mask airways after two washing protocols.
Stone T; Brimacombe J; Keller C; Kelley D; Clery G
Anaesth Intensive Care; 2004 Jun; 32(3):390-3. PubMed ID: 15264736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The ProSeal has a shorter life-span than the Classic laryngeal mask airway.
Doneley S; Brimacombe J; Keller C; von Goedecke A
Anesth Analg; 2005 Feb; 100(2):590-593. PubMed ID: 15673899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparative life cycle assessment of disposable and reusable laryngeal mask airways.
Eckelman M; Mosher M; Gonzalez A; Sherman J
Anesth Analg; 2012 May; 114(5):1067-72. PubMed ID: 22492190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Eliminating protein from reusable laryngeal mask airways. A study comparing routinely cleaned masks with three alternative cleaning methods.
Coetzee GJ
Anaesthesia; 2003 Apr; 58(4):346-53. PubMed ID: 12648116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Protein contamination of the Laryngeal Mask Airway and its relationship to re-use.
Greenwood J; Green N; Power G
Anaesth Intensive Care; 2006 Jun; 34(3):343-6. PubMed ID: 16802488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of the LMA-classic with the new disposable soft seal laryngeal mask in spontaneously breathing adult patients.
Van Zundert AA; Fonck K; Al-Shaikh B; Mortier E
Anesthesiology; 2003 Nov; 99(5):1066-71. PubMed ID: 14576541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. How do different brands of size 1 laryngeal mask airway compare with face mask ventilation in a dedicated laryngeal mask airway teaching manikin?
Tracy MB; Priyadarshi A; Goel D; Lowe K; Huvanandana J; Hinder M
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed; 2018 May; 103(3):F271-F276. PubMed ID: 28802261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme and Laryngeal Mask Airway Proseal with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomised controlled trial.
Beleña JM; Núñez M; Anta D; Carnero M; Gracia JL; Ayala JL; Alvarez R; Yuste J
Eur J Anaesthesiol; 2013 Mar; 30(3):119-23. PubMed ID: 23318811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of cuff-pressure changes in LMA-Classic and the new Soft Seal laryngeal masks during nitrous oxide anaesthesia in spontaneous breathing patients.
van Zundert AA; Fonck K; Al-Shaikh B; Mortier EP
Eur J Anaesthesiol; 2004 Jul; 21(7):547-52. PubMed ID: 15318467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A randomised crossover trial comparing a single-use polyvinyl chloride laryngeal mask airway with a single-use silicone laryngeal mask airway.
Bell SF; Morris NG; Rao A; Wilkes AR; Goodwin N
Anaesthesia; 2012 Dec; 67(12):1337-42. PubMed ID: 23020699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison between LMA-Classic and AMBU AuraOnce laryngeal mask airway in patients undergoing elective general anaesthesia with positive pressure ventilation.
Suzanna AB; Liu CY; Rozaidi SW; Ooi JS
Med J Malaysia; 2011 Oct; 66(4):304-7. PubMed ID: 22299547
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Presence of protein deposits on 'cleaned' re-usable anaesthetic equipment.
Miller DM; Youkhana I; Karunaratne WU; Pearce A
Anaesthesia; 2001 Nov; 56(11):1069-72. PubMed ID: 11703239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Stability of the LMA-ProSeal and standard laryngeal mask airway in different head and neck positions: a randomized crossover study.
Brimacombe J; Keller C
Eur J Anaesthesiol; 2003 Jan; 20(1):65-9. PubMed ID: 12553391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A fibreoptic scoring system to assess the position of laryngeal mask airway devices. Interobserver variability and a comparison between the standard, flexible and intubating laryngeal mask airways.
Keller C; Brimacombe J; Pühringer F
Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther; 2000 Nov; 35(11):692-4. PubMed ID: 11130130
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
