Comparison of Supreme Laryngeal Mask Airway and ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Hoşten, Tülay; Yıldız, Tülay Şahin; Kuş, Alparslan; Solak, Mustafa; Toker, Kamil

doi:10.5152/balkanmedj.2012.001

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the difference in our study may be of little clinical relevance as the pressures in the both groups were within clinically acceptable range and comparable to oropharyngeal seal pressure seen with various studies using PLMA for airway management in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. [516171819]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison between ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and Air-Q Blocker in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Gupta

Mahajan

Jatinder

et al. 2019

J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aims:ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is an established device for airway management, while Air-Q Blocker (AQB) is a relatively new supraglottic device. The aim of this study is to compare AQB against PLMA in adults undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia.Material and Methods:Eighty-eight adult patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia were randomly allocated into two groups. A drain tube (gastric tube for PLMA and blocker tube for AQB) was inserted through the drain channel of the respective device. PLMA was inserted in Group P (n = 44) and AQB was inserted in Group A (n = 44) to secure the airway. The primary endpoint was airway seal pressure. Secondarily, we sought to compare overall insertion success, ease of insertion, hemodynamic effects after initial placement, ease of drain tube placement, and perioperative oropharyngolaryngeal morbidity between the devices.Results:Oropharyngeal seal pressures for AQB and PLMA were 31.5 ± 2.41 and 29.41 ± 2.14 cm H2O, respectively (P = 0.01). Insertion time was longer with AQB than PLMA, 25.59 ± 5.71 and 18.66 ± 3.15 seconds, respectively (P = 0.001). Ease and success rate of insertion was better with PLMA compared to AQB. Failure of device insertion was seen in 2 cases of Group A. Gastric distension was seen in 4 patients in Group A, requiring replacement with endotracheal tube in two patients. Ventilation was successful in all 44 patients with PLMA. Both the devices were comparable in providing a patent airway and adequate oxygenation during controlled ventilation. There was an increased trend of airway trauma and complications in the AQB group.Conclusion:Both PLMA and AQB show similar efficacy in maintaining ventilation and oxygenation, during laparoscopic surgery. However, proper positioning and functioning of the blocker tube of AQB is a limiting factor, and needs further evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison between ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and Air-Q Blocker in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Gupta

Mahajan

Jatinder

et al. 2019

J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[10] where the first attempt success rates for the drainage tube insertion were 93% for P-LMA and 100% for S-LMA 100%. If the gastric tube is easily passed, it indirectly confirms correct placement of the supraglottic device.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hosten et al . [ 10 ] reported the first attempt success rates of 93% with both S-LMA and P-LMA. Mean airway device insertion time was significantly shorter with S-LMA than with P-LMA (12.5 ± 4.1 s vs. 15.6 ± 6.0 s; P = 0.02) in 60 adults undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gastric drain insertion was accomplished in 100% patients in both the groups and was successful in the first attempt in 88% in P-LMA group in comparison to 96% in S-LMA group the results of which are similar to those found by a study by Hosten et al . [ 10 ] where the first attempt success rates for the drainage tube insertion were 93% for P-LMA and 100% for S-LMA 100%. If the gastric tube is easily passed, it indirectly confirms correct placement of the supraglottic device.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative study of two laryngeal mask airways: Proseal laryngeal mask airway and supreme laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized paralyzed adults undergoing elective surgery

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context:Supraglottic airway devices can act as an alternative to endotracheal intubation in both normal and difficult airway. LMA Proseal (P-LMA) and LMA Supreme (S-LMA) alongwith acting as effective ventilating device, provide port for gastric drainage.Aim:The objective of this study was to compare the two devices for effective ventilation and complications.Setting and Design:A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Methods: 100 patients of ASA grade I–II undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia were included after ethical committee clearance and written consent. Patients were randomly allocated size 4 P-LMA (Group P) or S-LMA (Group S) (50 patients in each group). Insertion attempt, insertion time, oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and complications were compared.Results:There was no difference demographically. The first insertion attempts were successful in 92% with P-LMA and 96% with S-LMA. Insertion time was faster in S-LMA. The mean OLP was 24.04 cmH2O in Group P and 20.05 cmH2O in Group S. Complications were cough, mild blood staining.Conclusion:Both can act as an effective ventilatory devices. But where LMA Proseal provides a more effective glottic seal by having a greater OLP, single use LMA Supreme provides acceptable glottic seal with easier and faster insertion, therefore, it can be accepted as better alternative to LMA Proseal.

show abstract

“…Seet et al and Eschertzhuber et al [ 13 , 14 ] reported that the ASP was higher for P-LMA than SLMA. Hosten et al [ 15 ] claimed that the SLMA and P-LMA had similar leak pressure during laparoscopic cholecystectomy, suggesting G-LMA as a suitable airway device in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Direct comparative study will be required to confirm this.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparisons of clinical performance of guardian laryngeal mask with laryngeal mask airway ProSeal

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe 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).MethodsIn 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.ResultsThe airway sealing pressure at 60cmH2O 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.ConclusionThe Guardian laryngeal mask airway was associated with high airway sealing pressure with a quicker insertion of the device as well as gastric tube.Trial registrationClinical Trial.gov Identifier: NCT02063516. Date: June 2013Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12871-015-0039-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Comparison of Supreme Laryngeal Mask Airway and ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Cited by 7 publications

References 18 publications

A comparison between ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and Air-Q Blocker in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy

A comparison between ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and Air-Q Blocker in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Comparative study of two laryngeal mask airways: Proseal laryngeal mask airway and supreme laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized paralyzed adults undergoing elective surgery

Comparisons of clinical performance of guardian laryngeal mask with laryngeal mask airway ProSeal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About