PLMAvs. l-gel: A comparative evaluation of respiratory mechanics in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 451-457

  Sharma, Bimla ^a   Sehgal, Raminder ^a   Sahai, Chand ^a   Sood, Jayashree ^a  

^a SIR GANGA RAM HOSPITAL   (India)

Author keywords

Equipment; I gel; Laparoscopy; Masks anaesthesia; ProSealTM LMA; Respiratory mechanics; Ventilation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855841101     PISSN: 09709185     EISSN: 22312730     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Dyer RA, Llewellyn RL, James MFM. Total i.v. anaesthesia with propofol and the laryngeal mask for orthopaedic surgery. Br J Anaesth 1995; 74: 123-8.
2. Richez B, Saltel L, Banchereau F, Torrielli R, Cros AM A New Single Use Supraglottic Device with a Noninflatable Cuff and an Esophageal Vent: An Observational Study of the i-gel. Anesth Analg 2008; 106: 1137-9.
3. Cork RC, Depa RM, Standen Jr. Prospective comparison of use of the laryngeal mask and endotracheal tube for ambulatory surgery. Anesth Analg 1994; 79: 719-27.
4. Bhatt SB, Kendall AP, Lin ES, Oh TE. Resistance and additional inspiratory work imposed by the laryngeal mask airway. A comparison with tracheal tubes. Anaesthesia 1992; 47: 343-7.
5. Higgins PR Chung F, Mezei G. Postoperative sore throat after ambulatory surgery. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88:582-4.
6. Sidaras G, Hunter JM. Is it safe to artificially ventilate a paralysed patient through the laryngeal mask? The jury is still out. Br J Anaesth 2001; 86(6): 749-53.
7. Cooper RM. The LMA, laparoscopic surgery and the obese patient can vs. should. Can J Anaesth 2003; 50: 5-10.
8. Brain AIJ, Verghese C, Strube PJ. The LMA 'ProSeal1-a laryngeal mask with an oesophageal vent. Br J Anaesth 2000; 84: 650-4.
9. i-gel user guide; [http:/www.i-gel.com] -i-gel instruction manual 2007.
10. Schmidbauer W, Bercker S, Volk T, Bogusch G, Mager G, and Kerner T. Oesophageal seal of the novel supralaryngeal airway device l-GelTM in comparison with the laryngeal mask airways ClassicTM and ProSealTM using a cadaver model. Br J Anaesth 2009; 102(1): 135-9.
11. Piper SN, Triem JG, Rohm KD, Maleck WH, Schollhorn TA, Boldt J. ProSeal-laryngeal mask versus endotracheal intubation in patients undergoing gynaecologic laparoscopy. Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther 2004; 39: 132-7.
12. Maltby JR, Beriault MT, Watson NC, Liepert D, Fick GH. The LMA-ProSealTM is an effective alternative to tracheal intubation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Can J Anaesth 2002; 49: 857-62.
13. Uppal V, Fletcher G, Kinsella J. Comparison of the i-gel with the cuffed tracheal tube during pressure-controlled ventilation. Br J Anaesth 2009; 102(2): 264-8.
14. Keller C, Brimacombe J, Puhringer F. A fiberoptic scoring system to assess the position of laryngeal mask devices. Inter-observer variability and a comparison between the standard, flexible and intubating laryngeal mask airway. Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther 2000; 35: 692-4.
15. Pelosi P, Foti G, Cereda M, Vicardi P, Gattinoni L. Effects of carbon dioxide insufflation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy on the respiratory system. Anaesthesia 1996; 51: 744-9.
16. Cunningham AJ, Brull SJ. Laparoscopic cholecyst¬ectomy: anesthetic implications. Anesth Analg 1993; 76: 1120-33.
17. O'Malley C, Cunningham AJ. Physiologic changes during laparoscopy. Anesthesiol Clin N Am 2001; 19(1): 1-19.
18. Nunn JF. Applied Respiratory Physiology, 3rd edn. London: Butterworths & Co. Publishers, 1987.
19. Brimacombe J, Keller C. The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: a randomized, crossover study with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paralysed, anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology 2000; 93: 104-9.
20. Bercker S, Schmidbauer W, Volk T, Bogusch G, Bubser HP, Hensel M, Kerner T. A Comparison of seal in seven supraglottic airway devices using a cadaver model of elevated esophageal pressure. Anesth Analg 2008; 106: 445-8.
21. Versichelen L, Serreyn R, Roily G, Vanderkerchove D. Physiological changes during anaesthesia adminis-tration for gynaecological laparoscopy. J Reprod Med 1984; 29: 697-700.
22. Lu PP, Brimacombe J, Yang C, Shyr M. ProSeal versus the Classic laryngeal mask airway for positive pressure ventilation during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88: 824-7.
23. Duffy BL. Regurgitation during pelvic laparoscopy. Br J Anaesth 1979; 51: 1089-90.
24. Maltby JR, Beriault MT, Watson NC, Liepert DJ, Fick GH. LMA-Classic and LMA-ProSeal are effective alternatives to endotracheal intubation for gynecologic laparoscopy. Can J Anaesth 2003; 50: 71-7.
25. Verghese C, Brimacombe Jr. Survey of laryngeal mask airway usage in 11,910 patients: safety and efficacy for conventional and nonconventional usage. Anesth Analg 1996; 82: 129-33.
26. Natalini G, Rosano A, Lanza G, Martinelli E, Pletti C, Bernardini A. Resistive load of laryngeal mask airway & ProSeal laryngealmask airway in mechanically ventilated patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2003; 47(6): 761-4.
27. Dumont L, Mattys M, Mardirosoff C, et al. Changes in pulmonary mechanics during laparoscopic gastroplasty in the morbidly obese patient. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1997; 41: 408-13.