Laryngeal mask airway indications: New frontiers for second-generation supraglottic airways

Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology

Volumn 28, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 717-726

  Timmermann, Arnd ^a   Bergner, Urs Adrian ^b   Russo, Sebastian Giuseppe ^c  

^a Department of Clinical Radiology   (Germany)

^b Männedorf Hospital   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Laparoscopic procedures; Obesity; Position test; Prone position; Supraglottic airways

Indexed keywords

BODY POSTURE; DEVICE MALPOSITION; FUNCTION TEST; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LARYNGEAL MASK; MAXIMUM MINUTE VENTILATION TEST; MEDICAL DEVICE COMPLICATION; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); OBESITY; OROPHARYNGEAL LEAK PRESSURE TEST; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; SUPRAGLOTTIC AIRWAY DEVICE; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT INDICATION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN;

EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HUMANS; LARYNGEAL MASKS;

EID: 84947052832     PISSN: 09527907     EISSN: 14736500     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000262     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. Yu SH, Beirne OR. Laryngeal mask airways have a lower risk of airway complications compared with endotracheal intubation: a systematic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 68:2359-2376.
2. 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; 112:652-657.
3. Kang JE, Oh CS, Choi JW, et al. Postoperative pharyngolaryngeal adverse events with laryngeal mask airway (LMA Supreme) in laparoscopic surgical procedures with cuff pressure limiting 25cmH2O: prospective, blind, and randomised study. Scientific World J 2014; 2014:709801.
4. Timmermann A. Modern airway management: current concepts for more patient safety. Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther 2009; 44:246-255.
5. Brimacombe J. Problems. In: Brimacombe J, editor. Laryngeal mask anesthesia: principles and practice. 2 ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2005. pp. 551-574.
6. Russo SG, Cremer S, Eich C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging study of the in vivo position of the extraglottic airway devices i-gel and LMA-Supreme in anaesthetized human volunteers. Br J Anaesth 2012; 109:996-1004.
7. Bercker S, Schmidbauer W, Volk T, et al. A comparison of seal in seven supraglottic airway devices using a cadaver model of elevated esophageal pressure. Anesth Analg 2008; 106:445-448.
8. Schmidbauer W, Bercker S, Volk T, et al. Oesophageal seal of the novel supralaryngeal airway device i-gel in comparison with the laryngeal mask airways Classic and ProSeal using a cadaver model. Br J Anaesth 2009; 102:135-139.
9. Timmermann A, Cremer S, Eich C, et al. Prospective clinical and fiberoptic evaluation of the Supreme laryngeal mask airway. Anesthesiology 2009; 110:262-265.
10. Timmermann A, Nickel EA, Puhringer F. Second generation laryngeal masks: expanded indications. Anaesthesist 2015; 64:7-15.
11. Russo SG, Wulf H. Advanced indications of the laryngeal mask: limitations of use. Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther 2014; 49:152-161.
12. O'Connor CJ Jr, Stix MS, Valade DR. Glottic insertion of the ProSeal LMA occurs in 6% of cases: a review of 627 patients. Can J Anaesth 2005; 52:199-204.
13. Brimacombe J, Keller C. Prime the ProSeal drain tube with lube from a tube! Can J Anaesth 2005; 52:338-339.
14. O'Connor CJ Jr, Borromeo CJ, Stix MS. Assessing ProSeal laryngeal mask positioning: the suprasternal notch test. Anesth Analg 2002; 94:1374-1375.
15. Stix MS, O'Connor CJ Jr. Depth of insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway. Br J Anaesth 2003; 90:235-237.
16. Maltby JR, Beriault MT, Watson NC, et al. The LMA-ProSeal is an effective alternative to tracheal intubation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Can J Anaesth 2002; 49:857-862.
17. Roth H, Genzwuerker HV, Rothhaas A, et al. The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and the laryngeal tube suction for ventilation in gynaecological patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2005; 22:117-122.
18. Sharma B, Sehgal R, Sahai C, Sood J. PLMA vs. I-gel: a comparative evaluation of respiratory mechanics in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2010; 26:451-457.
19. Teoh WH, Lee KM, Suhitharan T, et al. Comparison of the LMA Supreme vs the i-gel in paralysed patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery with controlled ventilation. Anaesthesia 2010; 65:1173-1179.
20. Chen BZ, Tan L, Zhang L, Shang YC. Is muscle relaxant necessary in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery with a ProSeal LMA? J Clin Anesth 2013; 25:32-35.
21. Gulec H, Cakan T, Yaman H, et al. Comparison of hemodynamic and metabolic stress responses caused by endotracheal tube and Proseal laryngeal mask airway in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Res Med Sci 2012; 17:148-153.
22. Belena JM, Nunez M, Anta D, et al. Comparison of laryngeal mask airway Supreme and laryngeal mask airway ProSeal with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2013; 30:119-123.
23. Mukadder S, Zekine B, Erdogan KG, et al. Comparison of the proseal, supreme, and i-gel SAD in gynecological laparoscopic surgeries. Scientific World J 2015; 2015:634320.
24. Sanders JC, Olomu PN, Furman JR. Detection, frequency and prediction of problems in the use of the proseal laryngeal mask airway in children. Paediatr Anaesth 2008; 18:1183-1189.
25. Stix MS, O'Connor CJ Jr. Maximum minute ventilation test for the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway. Anesth Analg 2002; 95:1782-1787.
26. Cook TM, Kelly FE. Time to abandon the 'vintage' laryngeal mask airway and adopt second-generation supraglottic airway devices as first choice. Br J Anaesth 2015; 115:497-479.
27. Goldmann K, Dieterich J, Roessler M. Laryngopharyngeal mucosal injury after prolonged use of the ProSeal LMA in a porcine model: a pilot study. Can J Anaesth 2007; 54:822-828.
28. Kammah M, Anez C. Prolonged use of the LMA Supreme. Can J Anaesth 2013; 60:411-412.
29. Braude D, Southard A, Bajema T, et al. Rapid sequence airway using the LMA-Supreme as a primary airway for 9h in a multisystem trauma patient. Resuscitation 2010; 81:1217.
30. Zoremba M, Aust H, Eberhart L, et al. Comparison between intubation and the laryngeal mask airway in moderately obese adults. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009; 53:436-442.
31. Brain AI, Verghese C, Strube PJ. The LMA 'ProSeal:' a laryngeal mask with an oesophageal vent. Br J Anaesth 2000; 84:650-654.
32. Nicholson A, Cook TM, Smith AF, et al. Supraglottic airway devices versus tracheal intubation for airway management during general anaesthesia in obese patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 9:CD010105.
33. Hinkelbein J. PRO: laryngeal masks can be used for surgery in the prone position. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2014; 31:253-255.
34. Staender S. CON: laryngeal masks must not be used for surgery in the prone position. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2014; 31:256-258.
35. Olsen KS, Petersen JT, Pedersen NA, Rovsing L. Self-positioning followed by induction of anaesthesia and insertion of a laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal intubation and subsequent positioning for spinal surgery in the prone position: a randomised clinical trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2014; 31:259-265.
36. Weksler N, Klein M, Rozentsveig V, et al. Laryngeal mask in prone position: pure exhibitionism or a valid technique. Minerva Anestesiol 2007; 73:33-37.
37. Lopez AM, Valero R. Use of supraglottic airway devices in patients positioned other than supine. Trends Anaesth Crit Care 2012; 65-70.
38. Lopez AM, Valero R, Hurtado P, et al. Comparison of the LMA Supreme with the LMA Proseal for airway management in patients anaesthetized in prone position. Br J Anaesth 2011; 107:265-271.
39. Sharma V, Verghese C, McKenna PJ. Prospective auditon 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.
40. Brimacombe JR, Wenzel V, Keller C. The proseal laryngeal mask airway in prone patients: a retrospective audit of 245 patients. Anaesth Intensive Care 2007; 35:222-225.
41. Chau SW, Wang FY, Wu CW, et al. Premolar loss following insertion of a Classic laryngeal mask airway in a patient in the prone position. J Clin Anesth 2011; 23:588-589.
42. Brimacombe J, Keller C. An unusual case of airway rescue in the prone position with the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway. Can J Anaesth 2005; 52:884.
43. Raphael J, Rosenthal-Ganon T, Gozal Y. Emergency airway management with a laryngeal mask airway in a patient placed in the prone position. J Clin Anesth 2004; 16:560-561.
44. Dingeman RS, Goumnerova LC, Goobie SM. The use of a laryngeal mask airway for emergent airway management in a prone child. Anesth Analg 2005; 100:670-671.
45. Taxak S, Gopinath A. Laryngeal mask airway classic as a rescue device after accidental extubation in a neonate in prone position. Indian J Anaesth 2011; 55:542.
46. Yao WY, Li SY, Sng BL, et al. The LMA Supreme in 700 parturients undergoing cesarean delivery: an observational study. Can J Anaesth 2012; 59:648-654.
47. Halaseh BK, Sukkar ZF, Hassan LH, et al. The use of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in caesarean section: experience in 3000 cases. Anaesth Intensive Care 2010; 38:1023-1028.
48. Han TH, Brimacombe J, Lee EJ, Yang HS. The laryngeal mask airway is effective (and probably safe) in selected healthy parturients for elective cesarean section: a prospective study of 1067 cases. Can J Anaesth 2001; 48:1117-1121.
49. Cook TM. Supraglottic airway devices. In: Cook TM, Woodall N, Frerk C, editors. Major complications of airway management in the United Kingdom: Fourth National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Difficult Airway Society. London: The Royal College of Anaesthetists; 2011. pp. 86-95.