Single-use LMAs - A cautionary tale [7]

British Journal of Anaesthesia

Volumn 97, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 265-266

  Flynn, Per ^a   Clarke, S ^a   Mitchell, V ^a  

^a UCH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANESTHESIST; ARTIFICIAL VENTILATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; DEVICE INFECTION; DISPOSABLE EQUIPMENT; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; INFECTION RISK; INSTRUMENT STERILIZATION; LARYNGEAL MASK; LETTER; PEER REVIEW; PERFORMANCE; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; CROSS INFECTION; EQUIPMENT; EVALUATION; NOTE;

CROSS INFECTION; DISPOSABLE EQUIPMENT; EQUIPMENT CONTAMINATION; EQUIPMENT FAILURE; HUMANS; LARYNGEAL MASKS;

EID: 33747371724     PISSN: 00070912     EISSN: 14716771     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bja/ael166     Document Type: Letter

References (4)

1. Cook TM. The classic laryngeal mask airway: A tried and tested airway. What now? Br J Anaesth 2006; 96: 149-52
2. Smith G, Variant CJD. What you need to know at present. R Coll Anaesth Bull 2001; 7: 302-4
3. Van Zundert AA, Fonck K, Al-Shaikh B, Mortier E. Comparison of the LMA-classic with the new disposable soft seal laryngeal mask in spontaneously breathing adult patients. Anesthesiology 2003; 99: 1066-71
4. Cook TM, Trumpelmann P, Beringer R, Stedeford J. A randomised comparison of the Portex Softseal laryngeal mask airway with the LMA-Unique during anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 2005; 60: 1218-25