Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (58)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Keller, C.
Right arrow Articles by Brimacombe, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Keller, C.
Right arrow Articles by Brimacombe, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2000, Vol. 85, No. 2 262-266
© 2000 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Mucosal pressure and oropharyngeal leak pressure with the ProSeal versus laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized paralysed patients

C. Keller1 and J. Brimacombe2,*

1Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Leopold-Franzens University, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. 2University of Queensland, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Cairns Base Hospital, Australia

{dagger}LMA® is the property of Intavent Limited.

The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is a new laryngeal mask device with a larger, wedge-shaped cuff and a drainage tube. We tested the hypothesis that directly measured mucosal pressure and oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) are higher for the PLMA compared with the laryngeal mask airway (LMA{dagger}). We also assess the mechanism of seal, and the reliability of cuff volume, in vivo intracuff pressure and calculated mucosal pressure (in vivo minus in vitro intracuff pressure) to predict directly measured mucosal pressure. Thirty-two anaesthetized, paralysed adult patients were randomly allocated to receive either a size 4 LMA or PLMA. Microchip sensors were attached at locations corresponding to: (a) base of tongue; (b) distal oropharynx; (c) hypopharynx; (d) lateral pharynx; (e) posterior pharynx; and (f) pyriform fossa. In vitro and in vivo intracuff pressures, OLP and directly measured mucosal pressure were documented at zero volume and after each 10 ml up to 40 ml. Directly measured mucosal pressure was similar between devices for a given cuff volume, but was lower for the PLMA for a given OLP. Directly measured mucosal pressure was highest in the distal oropharynx for both devices, but rarely (<5%) exceeded 35 cm H2O. OLP was higher for the PLMA at all cuff volumes. Directly measured mucosal pressure was usually lower than OLP for both devices, and there was a positive correlation between directly measured mucosal pressure and OLP. Cuff volume, in vivo intracuff pressure and calculated mucosal pressure were poor to moderate predictors of directly measured mucosal pressure for the LMA and PLMA. We conclude that the PLMA forms a better seal than the LMA without an increase in directly measured mucosal pressure.

Br J Anaesth 2000; 85: 262–6

* Correspondingauthor


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
M. Micaglio, R. Bonato, M. De Nardin, M. Parotto, D. Trevisanuto, V. Zanardo, N. Doglioni, and C. Ori
Prospective, randomized comparison of ProSealTM and ClassicTM laryngeal mask airways in anaesthetized neonates and infants
Br. J. Anaesth., August 1, 2009; 103(2): 263 - 267.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
S. Eschertzhuber, J. Brimacombe, M. Hohlrieder, K.-H. Stadlbauer, and C. Keller
Gum Elastic Bougie-Guided Insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway Is Superior to the Digital and Introducer Tool Techniques in Patients with Simulated Difficult Laryngoscopy Using a Rigid Neck Collar
Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2008; 107(4): 1253 - 1256.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
M. Hohlrieder, J. Brimacombe, A. von Goedecke, and C. Keller
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., October 1, 2007; 99(4): 576 - 580.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
T. M. Cook and B. Gibbison
Analysis of 1000 consecutive uses of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airwayTM by one anaesthetist at a district general hospital
Br. J. Anaesth., September 1, 2007; 99(3): 436 - 439.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
C. W. Li, F. S. Xue, Y. C. Xu, Y. Liu, P. Mao, K. P. Liu, Q. Y. Yang, G. H. Zhang, and H. T. Sun
Cricoid Pressure Impedes Insertion of, and Ventilation Through, the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway in Anesthetized, Paralyzed Patients
Anesth. Analg., May 1, 2007; 104(5): 1195 - 1198.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
M. Lopez-Gil, J. Brimacombe, and G. Garcia
A randomized non-crossover study comparing the ProSealTM and ClassicTM laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized children
Br. J. Anaesth., December 1, 2005; 95(6): 827 - 830.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
J. Brimacombe, G. Clarke, and C. Keller
Lingual nerve injury associated with the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: a case report and review of the literature
Br. J. Anaesth., September 1, 2005; 95(3): 420 - 423.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
C. Keller, J. Brimacombe, P. Lirk, and F. Puhringer
Failed Obstetric Tracheal Intubation and Postoperative Respiratory Support with the ProSealTM Laryngeal Mask Airway
Anesth. Analg., May 1, 2004; 98(5): 1467 - 1470.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
T. Cook, E. Figueredo, and M. Martinez
Comparing the ProSealTM Laryngeal Mask Airway with the Laryngeal Tube Airway * Response
Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2003; 97(4): 1202 - 1203.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
T. M. Cook, M. Taylor, C. McKinstry, S. R. Laver, and J. P. Nolan
Use of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway to Initiate Ventilation During Intensive Care and Subsequent Percutaneous Tracheostomy
Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2003; 97(3): 848 - 850.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
S. Kihara and J. Brimacombe
Sex-Based ProSealTM Laryngeal Mask Airway Size Selection: A Randomized Crossover Study of Anesthetized, Paralyzed Male and Female Adult Patients
Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2003; 97(1): 280 - 284.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
G. Natalini, M. E. Franceschetti, M. T. Pantelidi, A. Rosano, G. Lanza, and A. Bernardini
Comparison of the standard laryngeal mask airway and the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in obese patients
Br. J. Anaesth., March 1, 2003; 90(3): 323 - 326.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
E. Figueredo, M. Martinez, and T. Pintanel
A Comparison of the ProSealTM Laryngeal Mask and the Laryngeal Tube(R) in Spontaneously Breathing Anesthetized Patients
Anesth. Analg., February 1, 2003; 96(2): 600 - 605.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
S. J. Twigg and T. M. Cook
Anaesthesia in an adult with Rubenstein-Taybi syndrome using the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway
Br. J. Anaesth., November 1, 2002; 89(5): 786 - 787.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
J. Brimacombe, C. Keller, and L. Brimacombe
A Comparison of the Laryngeal Mask Airway ProSealTM and the Laryngeal Tube Airway in Paralyzed Anesthetized Adult Patients Undergoing Pressure-Controlled Ventilation
Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2002; 95(3): 770 - 776.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
N. R. Evans, S. V. Gardner, M. F. M. James, J. A. King, P. Roux, P. Bennett, R. Nattrass, R. Llewellyn, and D. Visu
The ProSeal laryngeal mask: results of a descriptive trial with experience of 300 cases{dagger}
Br. J. Anaesth., April 1, 2002; 88(4): 534 - 539.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
C. Keller, J. Brimacombe, A. Kleinsasser, and L. Brimacombe
The Laryngeal Mask Airway ProSealTM as a Temporary Ventilatory Device in Grossly and Morbidly Obese Patients Before Laryngoscope-Guided Tracheal Intubation
Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2002; 94(3): 737 - 740.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
A. Ng and G. Smith
Gastroesophageal Reflux and Aspiration of Gastric Contents in Anesthetic Practice
Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2001; 93(2): 494 - 513.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.