Comparação de via aérea por máscara laríngea Supreme e via aérea por máscara laríngea ProSeal para trauma laringofaríngeo e morbidade pós-operatória em crianças

Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia

Volumn 63, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 445-449

  Aydogmus, Meltem Turkay ^a   Eksioglu, Birsen ^a   Oba, Sibel ^a   Ünsal, Oya ^a   Türk, Hacer Sebnem Yeltepe ^a   Sinikoglu, Sitki Nadir ^a   Tug, Aslihan ^a  

^a SISLI ETFAL TRAINING AND RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (Turkey)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84889671031     PISSN: 00347094     EISSN: 1806907X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjan.2012.08.002     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Singh M., Bharti R., Kapoor D. Repair of damaged supraglottic airway devices: A novel method. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2010, 17:18-33.
2. Sharma V., Verghese C., McKenna P.J. Prospective audit on the use of the LMA-Supreme for airway management of adult patients undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery in prone position. Br J Anaesth. 2010, 105:228-232.
3. Ali A., Canturk S., Turkmen A., et al. Comparison of the laryngeal mask airway Supreme and laryngeal mask airway Classic in adults. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009, 26:1010-1014.
4. Verghese C., Ramaswamy B. LMA-Supreme-a new single-use LMA with gastric access: a report on its clinical efficacy. Br J Anaesth. 2008, 101:405-410.
5. Seet E., Rajeev S., Firoz T., et al. Safety and efficacy of laryngeal mask airway Supreme versus laryngeal mask airway ProSeal: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2010, 27:602-607.
6. Tekin M., Kati I., Tomak Y., et al. Comparison of the effects of room air and N2O + O2 used for ProSeal LMA cuff inflation on cuff pressure and oropharyngeal structure. J Anesth. 2008, 22:467-470.
7. Martins R.H., Braz J.R., Defaveri J., et al. Effect of high laryngeal mask airway intracuff pressure on the laryngopharyngeal mucosa of dogs. Laryngoscope. 2000, 110:645-650.
8. Seet E., Yousaf F., Gupta S., et al. Use of manometry for laryngeal mask airway reduces postoperative pharyngolaryngeal adverse events: a prospective, randomized trial. Anesthesiology. 2010, 12:652-657.
9. Brimacombe J., Richardson C., Keller C., et al. Mechanical closure of the vocal cords with the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal. Br J Anaesth. 2002, 88:296-297.
10. Chia Y.Y., Lee S.W., Liu K. Propofol causes less postoperative pharyngeal morbidity than thiopental after the use of a laryngeal mask airway. Anesth Analg. 2008, 106:123-126.
11. Grady D.M., McHardy F., Wong J., et al. Pharyngolaryngeal morbidity with the laryngeal mask airway in spontaneously breathing patients: does size matter?. Anesthesiology. 2001, 94:760-766.
12. Timmermann A., Cremer S., Eich C., et al. Prospective clinical and fiberoptic evaluation of the Supreme laryngeal mask airway. Anesthesiology. 2009, 110:262-265.
13. Timmermann A., Cremer S., Heuer J., et al. Laryngeal mask LMA Supreme. Application by medical personnel inexperienced in airway management. Anaesthesist. 2008, 57:970-975.
14. Tan B.H., Chen E.G., Liu E.H. An evaluation of the laryngeal mask airway supreme' in 100 patients. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2010, 8:550-554.
15. Jagannathan N., Sohn L.E., Sawardaker A., et al. A randomised comparison of the LMA Supreme™ and LMA ProSeal™ in children. Anaesthesia. 2012, 67:632-639.
16. Eschertzhuber S., Brimacombe J., Hohlrieder M., et al. The laryngeal mask airway Supreme-a single use laryngeal mask airway with an oesophageal vent. A randomised, crossover study with the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal in paralysed, anaesthetised patients. Anaesthesia. 2009, 64:79-83.