In cadavers, directly measured mucosal pressures are similar for the Unique™ and the Soft Seal™ laryngeal mask airway devices

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia

Volumn 51, Issue 8, 2004, Pages 834-837

  Keller, Christian ^a   Brimacombe, Joseph ^b   Moriggl, Bernhard ^c   Lirk, Philipp ^a   von Goedecke, Achim ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF INNSBRUCK   (Austria)

^b CAIRNS BASE HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CADAVER; COMPLIANCE (PHYSICAL); CONTROLLED STUDY; CUFF; HUMAN; HYPOPHARYNX; IN VITRO STUDY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LARYNGEAL MASK; LARYNGOSCOPY; MALE; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; OROPHARYNX; PHARYNX; PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZATION; RESPIRATORY TRACT DISEASE; RESPIRATORY TRACT MUCOSA; SENSOR; TONGUE; VOLUMETRY;

EID: 9444265245     PISSN: 0832610X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF03018460     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Verghese C, Berlet J, Kapila A, Pollard R. Clinical assessment of the single use laryngeal mask airway-the LMA-Unique™ . Br J Anaesth 1998; 80: 677-9.
2. Brimacombe J, Keller C, Morris R, Mecklem D. A comparison of the disposable versus the reusable laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed adult patients. Anesth Analg 1998; 87: 921-4.
3. Brimacombe J, Keller C. Laryngeal mask airway size selection in males and females: ease of insertion, oropharyngeal leak pressure, pharyngeal mucosal pressures and anatomical position. Br J Anaesth 1999; 82: 703-7.
4. Brimacombe J, Keller C, Giampalmo M, Sparr HJ, Berry A. Direct measurement of mucosal pressures exerted by cuff and non-cuff portions of tracheal tubes with different cuff volumes and head and neck positions. Br J Anaesth 1999; 82: 708-11.
5. Brimacombe J, Keller C. Pharyngeal mucosa pressures (Letter, reply). Anesthesiology 2000; 92: 620-1.
6. Brimacombe J, Keller C. Performance of the size 5 laryngeal mask airway in males and females. Anaesthesiol Intensivmed Notfalmed Schmerzther 2000; 35: 567-70.
7. Keller C, Brimacombe JR, Keller K, Morris R. Comparison of four methods for assessing airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in adult patients. Br J Anaesth 1999; 82: 286-7.
8. Keller C, Brimacombe J, Puehringer F. A fibreoptic scoring system to assess the position of laryngeal mask airway devices. Interobserver variability and a comparison between the standard, flexible and intubating laryngeal mask airways. Anaesthesiol Intensivmed Notfalmed Schmerzther 2000; 35: 692-4.
9. Keller C, Brimacombe J. Mucosal pressure, mechanism of seal, airway sealing pressure, and anatomic position for the disposable versus reusable laryngeal mask airways. Anesth Analg 1999; 88: 1418-20.
10. Gaddis GM, Gaddis ML. Introduction to biostatistics: part 5, statistical inference techniques for hypothesis testing with nonparametric data. Ann Emerg Med 1990; 19: 1054-9.
11. Brimacombe J, Keller C, Puehringer F. Pharyngeal mucosal pressure and perfusion. A fiberoptic evaluation of the posterior pharynx in anesthetized adult patients with a modified cuffed oropharyngeal airway. Anesthesiology 1999; 91: 1661-5.
12. Keller C, Brimacombe J, Boehler M, Loeckinger A, Puehringer F. The influence of cuff volume and anatomic location on pharyngeal, esophageal, and tracheal mucosal pressures with the esophageal tracheal combitube. Anesthesiology 2002; 96: 1074-7.
13. Keller C, Brimacombe J. Pharyngeal mucosal pressures, airway sealing pressures, and fiberoptic position with the intubating versus the standard laryngeal mask airway. Anesthesiology 1999; 90: 1001-6.
14. Brimacombe J, Keller C. The laryngeal mask airway in fresh cadavers versus paralysed anaesthetized patients: ease of insertion, airway sealing pressure, intracuff pressures and anatomic position. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1999; 16: 699-701.
15. Keller C, Brimacombe J. Mucosal pressure and oropharyngeal leak pressure with the ProSeal versus laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized paralysed patients. Br J Anaesth 2000; 85: 262-6.