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
  • [31] Evaluation of Preventive Effect of Zinc Lozenge on Sore Throat after Placement of ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway: A Randomised Controlled Study
    Jaiswal, Rajmala
    Aggarwal, Priyanka
    Deepika
    Chhikara, Monica
    Katewa, Manoj
    Yano, Teyiesito
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH, 2024, 18 (06) : UC1 - UC4
  • [32] ProSeal laryngeal mask airway foldover detection
    Christodoulou, C
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2004, 99 (01): : 312 - 313
  • [33] Optimizing insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway
    Tim Cook
    Cornelius J. O’Connor
    Michael S. Stix
    Dennis R. Valade
    Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, 2005, 52 : 885 - 886
  • [34] Oesophageal Doppler and the ProSeal™ Laryngeal Mask Airway
    Elkington, T
    Dobson, A
    ANAESTHESIA, 2005, 60 (08) : 827 - 827
  • [35] The applicability of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway for laparotomies
    Borkowski, A
    Perl, T
    Heuer, J
    Timmermann, A
    Braun, U
    ANASTHESIOLOGIE INTENSIVMEDIZIN NOTFALLMEDIZIN SCHMERZTHERAPIE, 2005, 40 (08): : 477 - 486
  • [36] Optimizing insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway
    Cook, T
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA-JOURNAL CANADIEN D ANESTHESIE, 2005, 52 (08): : 885 - 886
  • [37] A randomized study to compare ProSeal laryngeal mask airway with classic laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized patients
    Taxak, Susheela
    Kaur, Kiranpreet
    Kaushik, Shubham
    Singh, Rita
    EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2013, 29 (04) : 285 - 290
  • [38] A comparison of the laryngeal tube s and the LMA ProSeal laryngeal mask airway - A reply
    Klaver, N. S.
    Kuisenga, K.
    Ballas, A.
    Fidler, V.
    ANAESTHESIA, 2007, 62 (12) : 1298 - 1298
  • [39] PROSEAL LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY IN GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERIES
    Sridhar, C. B.
    Krishnan, Navaneetha
    JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION OF MEDICAL AND DENTAL SCIENCES-JEMDS, 2014, 3 (15): : 3997 - 4000
  • [40] Depth of insertion of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway
    Stix, MS
    O'Connor, CJ
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2003, 90 (02) : 235 - 237