Comparison of incidence of sore throat with laryngeal mask airway Protector and laryngeal mask airway ProSeal: A randomised clinical trial

被引:0
|
作者
Mohan, Vidya [1 ]
Rudingwa, Priya [1 ]
Panneerselvam, Sakthirajan [1 ]
Kuberan, Aswini [1 ]
Srinivasan, Gnanasekaran [1 ]
Arulprakasam, Santhosh [1 ]
机构
[1] Jawaharlal Inst Postgrad Med Educ & Res, Dept Anaesthesiol & Crit Care, Pondicherry 605006, India
关键词
Laryngeal masks; LMA (R) ProSeal; LMA (R) protector; pharyngitis; POST; postoperative; postoperative sore throat; risk factors; supraglottic airway device; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; INTRACUFF PRESSURE; ENDOTRACHEAL-TUBE;
D O I
10.4103/ija.ija_1068_23
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Background and Aims: Postoperative sore throat (POST) can be as high as 42% in supraglottic devices. LMA (R) Protector (TM) is a novel second-generation laryngeal mask airway (LMA) with Cuff Pilot (TM) technology that allows continuous cuff pressure monitoring. Elevated cuff pressure is a risk factor for POST in supraglottic devices, so we conducted this study to determine whether continuous cuff pressure monitoring can alleviate POST. Methods: This randomised double-blinded clinical trial compared the incidence of sore throat between LMA (R) Protector (TM) and LMA (R) ProSeal (TM) and was conducted in 118 patients scheduled for elective short surgical procedures. They were randomised to either LMA (R) Protector (TM) (Group PT) or LMA (R) ProSeal (TM) (Group P). The airway was secured with either of the two devices. The primary outcome was the incidence of sore throat at 1, 6, and 24 hours postoperatively and compared using the Chi-square test along with other parameters like first attempt success rate and blood staining of the device. The time taken for insertion and oropharyngeal seal pressure were compared using an independent t-test. Results: The incidence of POST was low with Group PT (12%) compared to Group P (28.8%) (P = 0.005). The mean oropharyngeal seal pressure was significantly higher in Group PT than in Group P [33.72 (3.07) versus 27.72 (3.88) cm of H2O], P < 0.005. The first attempt success rate was 81.2% and 100% in LMA (R) Protector (TM) versus LMA (R) ProSeal (TM). Conclusion: LMA (R) Protector (TM) had a reduced incidence of POST compared to LMA ProSeal. However, a longer insertion time and difficult placement may be a concern.
引用
收藏
页码:637 / 643
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparison of laryngeal mask airway supreme and laryngeal mask airway proseal for laryngopharyngeal trauma and postoperative morbidity in children
    Aydogmus, Meltem Turkay
    Eksioglu, Birsen
    Oba, Sibel
    Unsal, Oya
    Turk, Hacer Sebnem Yeltepe
    Sinikoglu, Saki Nadir
    Tug, Aslihan
    REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE ANESTESIOLOGIA, 2013, 63 (06): : 445 - 449
  • [22] Comparing the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway with the laryngeal tube airway -: In response
    Figueredo, E
    Martinez, M
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2003, 97 (04): : 1203 - 1203
  • [23] A comparison of the laryngeal tube s and the LMA ProSeal laryngeal mask airway
    Cook, T. M.
    ANAESTHESIA, 2007, 62 (12) : 1297 - 1298
  • [24] The supraglottic airway I-gel in comparison with ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and classic laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized patients
    Shin, Won-Jung
    Cheong, Yu-Seon
    Yang, Hong-Seuk
    Nishiyama, Tomoki
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2010, 27 (07) : 598 - 601
  • [25] Resistive load of laryngeal mask airway and proseal laryngeal mask airway in mechanically ventilated patients
    Natalini, G
    Rosano, A
    Lanza, G
    Martinelli, E
    Pletti, C
    Bernardini, A
    ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2003, 47 (06) : 761 - 764
  • [26] Airway leak pressure of the ProSeal®-laryngeal mask airway
    Freisburger, C.
    Goldmann, K.
    ANAESTHESIST, 2006, 55 (12): : 1255 - 1258
  • [27] Airway protection with the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway in a child
    Keller, C
    Brimacombe, J
    Von Goedecke, A
    Lirk, P
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2004, 14 (12) : 1021 - 1022
  • [28] Instrumental and randomised clinical comparison between laryngeal mask airway Proseal and Supreme in pediatric patients
    Santambrogio, Luisa
    Righi, Sabrina
    Pinciroli, Rosa L.
    Piro, Eugenia
    D'alessio, Antonio
    Minuto, Aldo
    TRENDS IN ANAESTHESIA AND CRITICAL CARE, 2020, 30 : 14 - 21
  • [29] Prevention of postoperative sore throat during use of the laryngeal mask airway
    Lacroix, O
    Billard, V
    Bourgain, JL
    Debaene, B
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1996, 76 : A51 - A51
  • [30] Sore throat with nondeflated versus deflated supreme laryngeal mask airway
    Rudingwa, Priya
    Panneerselvam, Sakthi Rajan
    Kuberan, Aswini
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2022, 39 (02) : 186 - 186