Skip Navigation



BJA Advance Access published online on June 29, 2007

British Journal of Anaesthesia, doi:10.1093/bja/aem172
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
99/3/436    most recent
aem172v1
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 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 arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cook, T. M.
Right arrow Articles by Gibbison, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cook, T. M.
Right arrow Articles by Gibbison, B.
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 2007. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Analysis of 1000 consecutive uses of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airwayTM by one anaesthetist at a district general hospital{dagger}

T. M. Cook* and B. Gibbison

Royal United Hospital, Combe Park, Bath BA1 3NG, UK

* Corresponding author. E-mail: timcook007{at}googlemail.com

Background: The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA), introduced to UK practice in late 2001, offers potential performance and safety benefits over other airways such as the classic laryngeal mask airway. There are no large series reporting its use.

Methods: Data from a prospective, consecutive series of 1000 size 3–5 PLMA uses, by one anaesthetist, were analysed to examine whether performance in routine and advanced practice is similar to that reported in formal trials.

Results: Patients were female in 52% of cases, median age 52 (range 8–101) yr, median weight 78 kg (10% over 100 kg, 24% over 90 kg). Procedures included 12% laparoscopic and 5% open abdominal surgery. Overall insertion success was 99.4%, (first and second attempt success 85% and 12%, respectively). Median insertion time was 12 s (93% <30 s). Insertion success did not differ between genders, or between mask sizes. Median airway seal was 32 cm H2O (range 8–40, 94% seal >20 cm H2O). Specific tests confirmed correct positioning in 98.5% of cases. Of six failures, two occurred during management of difficult airways. Minor airway obstruction occurred in 2.7%. Blood was visible on 8% of removed PLMAs and more commonly after more than one insertion attempt (38 vs 4.7%, {chi}2 P<0.0001). In three cases minor regurgitation without aspiration occurred.

Conclusions: In the hands of a regular user, the PLMA was associated with a high rate of insertion success during routine and advanced use in relatively unselected patients. Correct placement rates approached 100%. The incidence of complications was low.

Keywords: anaesthesia, audit; equipment, airway; equipment, masks anaesthesia


{dagger} Declaration of interest. Dr Tim Cook has been paid by Intavent Orthofix and the LMA company, both of which manufacture laryngeal masks, for lecturing. Neither company had any involvement in this paper.


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
C. Verghese and B. Ramaswamy
LMA-SupremeTM--a new single-use LMATM with gastric access: a report on its clinical efficacy
Br. J. Anaesth., September 1, 2008; 101(3): 405 - 410.
[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.