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 (78)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cook, T. M.
Right arrow Articles by Baskett, P. J. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cook, T. M.
Right arrow Articles by Baskett, P. J. F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2002, Vol. 88, No. 4 527-533
© 2002 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Clinical Investigations

Randomized crossover comparison of the ProSeal with the classic laryngeal mask airway in unparalysed anaesthetized patients

T. M. Cook*,{dagger},1, J. P. Nolan1, C. Verghese2, P. J. Strube3, M. Lees4, J. M. Millar5 and P. J. F. Baskett6

1Royal United Hospital, Combe Park, Bath BA1 3NG, UK. 2Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading, Berkshire RG1 5AN, UK. 3Wycombe Hospital, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire HP11 2TT, UK. 4King’s College Hospital, Denmark Hill, London SE5 9SR, UK. 5Oxford Radcliffe Hospital Trust, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK. 6Frenchay Hospital, Bristol BS16 1LE, UK*Corresponding author

{dagger}Declaration of interest. T.M. Cook received an honorarium for addressing staff of the company of Intavent Orthofix.

Background. The ProSeal is a wire-reinforced laryngeal mask airway with an additional drain tube that leads to the distal tip of the laryngeal cuff. The design should improve the seal with the larynx.

Methods. The ProSeal and classic laryngeal mask airways were compared in 180 patients in a randomized crossover study. Patients were anaesthetized without neuromuscular blocking drugs.

Results. The ProSeal took more time and more attempts to insert successfully than the classic laryngeal mask airway. Insertion was successful on the first attempt in 81% of cases with the ProSeal and 90% with the classic laryngeal mask airway. The ProSeal required more air to achieve an intracuff pressure of 60 cm H2O (6 ml more for size 4 and 12 ml more for size 5). Laryngeal seal pressure was better with the ProSeal than the classic laryngeal mask airway. Median seal pressure was 29 cm H2O with the ProSeal and 18 cm H2O with the classic laryngeal mask airway. Laryngeal seal pressure was greater than 20 cm H2O in 87% of patients with the ProSeal and 41% with the classic laryngeal mask airway. Laryngeal seal pressure was greater than 40 cm H2O in 21% of patients with the ProSeal and in none of the patients with the classic laryngeal mask. Once placed, the ProSeal remained a stable and effective airway. Gastric tube insertion through the drain tube was attempted in 147 cases and was successful in 135 (92%).

Conclusion. The ProSeal is more difficult to insert than the classic laryngeal mask airway but allows positive pressure ventilation more reliably than the classic laryngeal mask airway.

Br J Anaesth 2002; 88: 527–33


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
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
K. Goldmann, C. Hechtfischer, A. Malik, A. Kussin, and C. Freisburger
Use of ProSealTM Laryngeal Mask Airway in 2114 Adult Patients: A Prospective Study
Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2008; 107(6): 1856 - 1861.
[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
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
C. A. Hagberg, F. S. Jensen, H. V. Genzwuerker, R. Krivosic-Horber, B. U. Schmitz, J. Hinkelbein, M. Contzen, H. Menu, and K. Bourzoufi
A Multicenter Study of the Ambu(R) Laryngeal Mask in Nonparalyzed, Anesthetized Patients
Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2005; 101(6): 1862 - 1866.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
T. M. Cook, M. Asif, R. Sim, and J. Waldron
Use of a ProSealTM laryngeal mask airway and a Ravussin cricothyroidotomy needle in the management of laryngeal and subglottic stenosis causing upper airway obstruction
Br. J. Anaesth., October 1, 2005; 95(4): 554 - 557.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
T. M. Cook and J. Cranshaw
Randomized crossover comparison of ProSeal(R) Laryngeal Mask Airway with Laryngeal Tube Sonda(R) during anaesthesia with controlled ventilation
Br. J. Anaesth., August 1, 2005; 95(2): 261 - 266.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
K. Goldmann and C. Jakob
A Randomized Crossover Comparison of the Size 21/2 Laryngeal Mask Airway ProSealTM Versus Laryngeal Mask Airway-ClassicTM in Pediatric Patients
Anesth. Analg., June 1, 2005; 100(6): 1605 - 1610.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
T Cook and T. Asai
Who is at increased risk of pulmonary aspiration?
Br. J. Anaesth., May 1, 2005; 94(5): 690 - 691.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
T. M. Cook
Use of the CobraPLATM for Percutaneous Cricothyroidotomy and Tracheostomy
Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2005; 100(3): 902 - 902.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
H. Shimbori, K. Ono, T. Miwa, N. Morimura, M. Noguchi, and K. Hiroki
Comparison of the LMA-ProSealTM and LMA-ClassicTM in children
Br. J. Anaesth., October 1, 2004; 93(4): 528 - 531.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
A. Bullingham, T. M. Cook, R. Awan, and J. P. Nolan
Use of the ProSealTM laryngeal mask airway for airway maintenance during emergency Caesarean section after failed intubation
Br. J. Anaesth., June 1, 2004; 92(6): 903 - 904.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
M. Kodaka, Y. Okamoto, K. Koyama, and H. Miyao
Predicted values of propofol EC50 and sevoflurane concentration for insertion of laryngeal mask ClassicTM and ProSealTM
Br. J. Anaesth., February 1, 2004; 92(2): 242 - 245.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
R. Awan, J. P. Nolan, and T. M. Cook
Use of a ProSealTM laryngeal mask airway for airway maintenance during emergency Caesarean section after failed tracheal intubation
Br. J. Anaesth., January 1, 2004; 92(1): 144 - 146.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
T. M. Cook and M. V. Porter
Randomized comparison of the classic Laryngeal Mask AirwayTM with the Airway Management DeviceTM during anaesthesia
Br. J. Anaesth., November 1, 2003; 91(5): 672 - 677.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
T. M. Cook, C. McKinstry, R. Hardy, and S. Twigg
Randomized crossover comparison of the ProSealTM laryngeal mask airway with the Laryngeal Tube(R) during anaesthesia with controlled ventilation
Br. J. Anaesth., November 1, 2003; 91(5): 678 - 683.
[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
 Br J AnaesthHome page
T. M. Cook, B. McCormick, and T. Asai
Randomized comparison of laryngeal tube with classic laryngeal mask airway for anaesthesia with controlled ventilation
Br. J. Anaesth., September 1, 2003; 91(3): 373 - 378.
[Abstract] [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
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]


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.