A randomised crossover trial comparing a single‐use polyvinyl chloride laryngeal mask airway with a single‐use silicone laryngeal mask airway

Abstract

SummaryWe compared insertion rates of single-use polyvinyl chloride laryngeal mask airways (LMAs) vs single-use silicone LMAs in 72 anaesthetised patients. Both airways were produced by Flexicare Medical. Laryngeal mask airway insertion was successful on the first attempt in 68 ⁄ 72 (94%) polyvinyl chloride LMAs vs 64 ⁄ 72 (89%) silicone LMAs (p = 0.39). Overall insertion rates were 72 ⁄ 72 (100%) for the polyvinyl chloride LMAs and 71 ⁄ 72 (99%) for the silicone LMAs (p = 1.0). Mean (SD) insertion times were similar for polyvinyl chloride and silicone LMAs: 24.3 (5.1)s vs 24.8 (7.8)s (p = 0.64). Laryngeal mask airway position, as assessed using a fibrescope, was not different (p = 0.077). The median (IQR [range]) leak pressure was 16 (12-20 [6-30]) cmH 2 O for the polyvinyl LMA and 18 (13-22 [6-30]) cmH 2 O or the silicone LMA (p = 0.037). In conclusion, we did not find any important differences between polyvinyl chloride and silicone laryngeal mask airways.

Comparative efficacy and safety of the Ambu® AuraOnce™ laryngeal mask airway during general anaesthesia in adults: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Since the invention of the original laryngeal mask airway (LMA) by Dr. Archie Brain in 1983, many modifications have been introduced into clinical anaesthesia practice . Recent growing concern about Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease and other communicable diseases, and the cost of cleaning and sterilisation of re‐usable devices, have popularised the use of disposable, single‐use airway devices . The Ambu ® AuraOnce ™ Laryngeal Mask (Ambu A⁄S, Ballerup, Denmark) is a disposable device for airway maintenance during anaesthesia.…”

Laryngeal mask airway protector generates higher oropharyngeal leak pressures compared to the laryngeal mask airway supreme

“…Recent studies have illustrated that silicone cuffs can reduce the risk of sore throat and achieve higher seal pressures. [ 1 2 ] A high seal pressure guarantees sufficient patient ventilation whenever high peak airway pressures are necessary. An integrated cuff pressure indicator permits continuous cuff pressure monitoring.…”

Do mask aperture bars of extraglottic airway devices prevent prolapse of epiglottis causing airway obstruction? A randomized crossover trial in anesthetized adult patients

“…Several of the newer EADs have no MABs, contain a varying number of epiglottic bars (2-8 bars), or show a modified version (ie, an epiglottic elevating bar). Randomized crossover studies are frequently used to compare the performance of EADs [5][6][7][8][9]). We tested in a prospective randomized cross-over study, the hypothesis that, in patients with normal airways, the anatomical position is similar amongst four single-use EADs with or without aperture bars.…”