These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Techniques for the insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: comparison of the Foley airway stylet tool with the introducer tool in a prospective, randomized study.
    Author: Chen MK, Hsu HT, Lu IC, Shih CK, Shen YC, Tseng KY, Cheng KI.
    Journal: BMC Anesthesiol; 2014; 14():105. PubMed ID: 25435806.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Many tools have been developed to facilitate the insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion, which can be impeded by folding of its soft cuff. The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of ProSeal LMA insertion guided by a soft, direct optical Foley Airway Stylet Tool (FAST) with the standard introducer tool (IT). METHODS: One hundred sixty patients undergoing general anesthesia using the ProSeal LMA as an airway management device were randomly allocated to either FAST-guided or IT-assisted groups. Following ProSeal LMA insertion, the glottic and esophageal openings were identified using a fiberoptic bronchoscope introduced through the airway and the drain tube. The primary outcomes were time taken to insert the ProSeal LMA and the success rate at the first attempt. Secondary end points included ease of insertion, hemodynamic response to insertion, and postoperative adverse events recorded in the recovery room and on the first postoperative morning. RESULTS: One hundred forty patients were included in the final analysis: 66 in the FAST-guided group and 74 in the IT-assisted group. The success rate of FAST device-guided ProSeal LMA insertion (95.7%) was broadly comparable with IT-assisted insertion (98.7%). However, the time taken to insert the ProSeal LMA was significantly longer when the FAST technique was used (p <0.001). The incidence of correct alignment of the airway tube and the drain tube did not differ significantly between the groups. There were no significant differences in ease of insertion or hemodynamic responses to insertion, except that the incidence of postoperative sore throat was significantly higher in the FAST group on the first postoperative day (22.2% compared with 6.8% in the IT group; p = 0.035). CONCLUSION: Both FAST-guided and IT-assisted techniques achieved correct ProSeal LMA positioning, but the IT technique was significantly quicker and less likely to cause a sore throat. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02048657.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]