Skip Navigation


BJA Advance Access originally published online on October 6, 2005
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2005 95(6):827-830; doi:10.1093/bja/aei234
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
95/6/827    most recent
aei234v1
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 (14)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lopez-Gil, M.
Right arrow Articles by Garcia, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lopez-Gil, M.
Right arrow Articles by Garcia, G.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2005. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org


RESPIRATION AND THE AIRWAY

A randomized non-crossover study comparing the ProSealTM and ClassicTM laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized children

M. Lopez-Gil1, J. Brimacombe2,*,{dagger} and G. Garcia3

1 Department of Anaesthesia and Reanimation, Maranon University Hospital, Madrid, Spain. 2 James Cook University, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Cairns Base Hospital, Cairns, Australia. 3 Dental School, Department of Pharmacology School of Medicine, University Complutense, Madrid, Spain

* Corresponding author. E-mail: jbrimaco{at}bigpond.net.au

Background. We tested the hypothesis that ease of insertion, oropharyngeal leak pressure, fibreoptic position, gastric insufflation, and the frequency of mucosal trauma differ between the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) and the classic laryngeal mask airway (cLMA) in anaesthetized children. For the PLMA, we also assessed the ease of gastric tube placement via the PLMA drain tube and measure residual gastric volume.

Methods. 240 consecutive ASA I–III children aged 1–16 yr were randomized for airway management with the ProSeal or cLMA.

Results. The time taken to provide an effective airway, the number of insertion attempts, fibreoptic position of the airway tube and frequency of mucosal trauma were similar, but oropharyngeal leak pressure was higher (33 vs 26 cm H2O, P<0.0001) and gastric insufflation less common (0 vs 6%, P<0.01) for the PLMA. Gastric tube insertion was successful at the first attempt in 106 of 120, and at the second attempt in 14 of 120. The mean (SD; range) value for residual gastric volume was 2.2 (5.9; 0–30) ml. There were no differences in performance among sizes for the PLMA and the cLMA.

Conclusions. We conclude that ease of insertion, fibreoptic position, and frequency of mucosal trauma are similar for the PLMA and cLMA in children, but oropharyngeal leak pressure is higher and gastric insufflation less common for the PLMA. Gastric tube insertion has a high success rate, provided the PLMA is correctly positioned.

{dagger} Declaration of interest. Dr Brimacombe has worked as a consultant for the Laryngeal Mask Company, who manufacture the ProSealTM laryngeal mask airway.


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
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
Anesth. Analg.Home page
M. Micaglio, M. Parotto, D. Trevisanuto, and V. Zanardo
Size 1 ProSealTM Laryngeal Mask Airway in Neonates
Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2006; 103(4): 1044 - 1045.
[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.