Comparison of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) with cuffed and uncuffed endotracheal tubes in infants

17Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

We aimed to compare cuffed and uncuffed endotracheal tubes (ETTs) with ProSealTM laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) in terms of airway security and extubation, starting out from the hypothesis that PLMA will provide alternative airway safety to the endotracheal tubes, and that airway complications will be less observed. After obtaining approval from the local Ethics Committee and parental informed consent, 120 pediatric patients 1-24 months old, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II, requiring general anesthesia for elective lower abdominal surgery, were randomized into PLMA (Group P, n = 40), cuffed ETT (Group C, n = 40), and uncuffed ETT (Group UC, n = 40) groups. The number of intubation or PLMA insertion attempts was recorded. Each patient's epigastrium was auscultated for gastric insufflation, leak volumes and air leak fractions (leak volume/inspiratory volume) were recorded. Post-operative adverse events related to airway management were also followed up during the first post-operative hour. Demographic and surgical data were similar among the groups. There were significantly fewer airway manipulations in the Group P than in the other groups (p < 0.01), and leak volume and air leak fractions were greater in the Group UC than in the other two groups (p < 0.01). Laryngospasm was significantly lower in the Group P during extubation and within the first minute of post-extubation than in the other groups (p < 0.01). Based on this study, PLMA may be a good alternative to cuffed and uncuffed ETTs for airway management of infants due to the ease of manipulation and lower incidence of laryngospasm.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ozden, E. S., Meco, B. C., Alanoglu, Z., & Alkıs, N. (2016). Comparison of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) with cuffed and uncuffed endotracheal tubes in infants. Bosnian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences, 16(4), 286–291. https://doi.org/10.17305/bjbms.2016.1219

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free