Gum Elastic Bougie-guided Insertion of the ProSeal™ Laryngeal Mask Airway

Abstract

We tested the hypothesis that gum elastic-bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal^™ Laryngeal Mask Airway is more frequently successful than introducer tool guided insertion after failed digital insertion. One hundred anaesthetized patients (ASA 1-2, aged 18 to 80 years) were randomized for the second insertion attempt using either the gum elastic bougie-guided or introducer tool techniques. The bougie-guided technique involved priming the drain tube with the bougie, placing the bougie in the oesophagus using laryngoscope guidance, digital insertion along the palato-pharyngeal curve, and bougie removal. The introducer tool technique involved attaching the introducer tool, single-handed rotation along the palatopharyngeal curve, and introducer tool removal. Failed insertion was classified as (i) failed passage into the pharynx, (ii) malposition, or (iii) ineffective ventilation. Any blood staining was documented. Insertion was more frequently successful (50/50 vs 15/50, P=0.0002) and faster (35±17s vs 54±45s, mean±SD, P=0.006) with the bougie-guided technique. All failed insertions with the introducer tool technique were successful with the bougie-guided technique. The aetiology of failed insertion was similar for the digital and introducer tool techniques in 94% (33/35) of patients. There was no blood staining on the bougie, laryngoscope or introducer tool at removal, but blood staining was more common on the Proseal laryngeal mask airway with the introducer tool technique (9/50 vs 2/50, P=0.03). We conclude that the gum elastic bougie-guided insertion has a higher success rate and causes less trauma than the insertion tool insertion technique after failed digital insertion of the Proseal Laryngeal Mask Airway.

Keywords

EQUIPMENT: laryngeal mask airway gum elastic bougie insertion

References

Brain

A.I.J.

, Verghese

, Strube

P.J.

The LMA “ProSeal”—a laryngeal mask with an oesophageal vent. Br J Anaesth 2000; 84: 650–654.

Brimacombe

, Keller

The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway. A randomized, crossover study with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed, anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology 2000; 93: 104–109.

Brimacombe

, Keller

, Fullekrug

A multicenter study comparing the ProSeal with the Classic laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized, nonparalyzed patients. Anesthesiology 2002; 96: 289–295.

LMA ProSeal™ Instruction Manual. 1st ed. San Diego: LMA North America Inc, 2000.

Keller

, Brimacombe

Mucosal pressure and oropharyngeal leak pressure with the Proseal versus the classic laryngeal mask airway. Br J Anaesth 2000; 85: 262–266.

Evans

N.R.

, Gardner

S.V.

, James

M.F.

The ProSeal laryngeal mask: results of a descriptive trial with experience of 300 cases. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88: 534–539.

Brimacombe

, Keller

, Berry

Gastric insufflation with the ProSeal laryngeal mask. Anesth Analg 2001; 92: 1614–1615.

Brimacombe

, Keller

, Vosoba Judd

Gum elastic bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal^™ laryngeal mask airway is superior to the digital and introducer tool techniques. Anesthesiology 2004; 100: 25–29.

Howarth

, Brimacombe

, Keller

Gum elastic bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway. A new technique. Anaesth Intensive Care 2002; 30: 624–627.

10.

Drage

M.P.

, Nunez

, Vaughan

R.S.

, Asai

Jaw thrusting as a clinical test to assess the adequate depth of anaesthesia for insertion of the laryngeal mask. Anaesthesia 1996; 51: 1167–1170.

11.

Brimacombe

, Keller

, Brimacombe

A comparison of the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal^™ and the laryngeal tube airway in paralyzed anesthetized adult patients undergoing pressure-controlled ventilation. Anesth Analg 2002; 95: 770–776.

12.

Brimacombe

, Keller

Stability of the ProSeal and standard laryngeal mask airway in different head and neck positions. A randomised crossover study. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2003; 20: 65–69.

13.

P.P.

, Brimacombe

, Yang

The ProSeal versus the Classic laryngeal mask airway for positive pressure ventilation during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88: 824–825.

14.

Keller

, Brimacombe

, Kleinsasser

, Brimacombe

The laryngeal mask airway ProSealTM as a temporary ventilatory device in grossly and morbidly obese patients before laryngoscope-guided tracheal intubation. Anesth Analg 2002; 94: 737–740.

15.

Brimacombe

, Keller

, Boehler

, Puehringer

Positive pressure ventilation with the ProSeal versus Classic laryngeal mask airway: A randomized, crossover study of healthy female patients. Anesth Analg 2001; 93: 1351–1353.

16.

Benumof

The laryngeal mask airway and the ASA difficult airway algorithm. Anesthesiology 1996; 84: 686–699.

17.

Brimacombe

, Keller

Awake fibreoptic-guided insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway. Anaesthesia 2002; 57: 719.

18.

Twigg

S.J.

, Cook

T.M.

Anaesthesia in an adult with Rubenstein-Taybi syndrome using the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway. Br J Anaesth 2002; 89: 786–787.

19.

Keller

, Brimacombe

, Lirk

, Puhringer

Failed obstetric intubation and postoperative respiratory support with the ProSeal^™ laryngeal mask airway. Anesth Analg 2004; 98: 1067–1070.

20.

Nixon

, Brimacombe

, Goldrick

, McManus

Airway rescue with the ProSeal^™ laryngeal mask airway in the Intensive Care Unit. Anaesth Intensive Care 2003; 31: 475–476.

21.

Brown

N.I.

, Mack

P.F.

, Mitera

D.M.

, Dhar

Use of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in a pregnant patient with a difficult airway during electroconvulsive therapy. Br J Anaesth 2003; 91: 752–754.