Comparison of the ease of laryngeal mask airway ProSeal insertion and the fiberoptic scoring according to the head position and the presence of a difficult airway.
10.4097/kjae.2011.60.4.244
- Author:
Joo Hyun JUN
1
;
Hee Jung BAIK
;
Jong Hak KIM
;
Youn Jin KIM
;
Ri Na CHANG
Author Information
1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea. baikhj@ewha.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Diffcult airway;
Laryngeal mask airway;
Neutral position;
Sniffing position
- MeSH:
Adult;
Head;
Humans;
Informed Consent;
Laryngeal Masks;
Masks
- From:Korean Journal of Anesthesiology
2011;60(4):244-249
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: The sniffing position is recommended for conventional laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion. However, there has been a high success rate of LMA insertion with the head in the neutral position. The effect of a difficult airway on the ease of LMA insertion is not clear. In this study, we compared the ease of LMA ProSeal(TM) (PLMA) insertion and the fiberoptic scoring according to the head position and the presence of a difficult airway. METHODS: After obtaining informed consent from the subjects, we enrolled 144 adult patients (age range: 18-65) with an ASA physical status 1 or 2. After evaluation of the airway, all the patients were grouped into the EA (easy airway) group (n = 68) and the DA (difficult airway) group (n = 76). According to the head position, each group was divided into the EA-SE (extension) group (n = 35), the EA-SN (sniffing) group (n = 33), the DA-SE group (n = 39) and the DA-SN group (n = 37). The success rate and insertion time at the first attempt were evaluated. The position of the PLMA was fiberoptically scored from the mask aperture of the airway tube in the original head position. After the head position was changed to the sniffing and neutral positions in the SE and SN group, respectively, the position of PLMA was re-evaluated fiberoptically. RESULTS: The success rate and insertion time at the first attempt and the fiberoptic score showed no significant difference among the groups. After head position was changed, there were no significant changes in the fiberopitc scores. CONCLUSIONS: A difficult airway and the head position had no influence on the ease of PLMA insertion and the fiberopic score. Therefore, the head position can be selected according to the individual patient's situation.
