EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Comparison of LMA Unique, Ambu laryngeal mask and Soft Seal laryngeal mask during routine surgical procedures



Comparison of LMA Unique, Ambu laryngeal mask and Soft Seal laryngeal mask during routine surgical procedures



European Journal of Anaesthesiology 24(2): 134-140



This study was performed to compare three disposable airway devices, the LMA Unique (LMA-U), the Ambu laryngeal mask (Ambu LM) and the Soft Seal laryngeal mask (Soft Seal LM) for elective general anaesthesia during controlled ventilation in non-paralysed patients. One hundred and twenty ASA I-III patients scheduled for routine minor obstetric surgery were randomly allocated to the LMA-U (n = 40), Ambu LM (n = 40) or Soft Seal LM (n = 40) groups, respectively. Patients were comparable with respect to weight and airway characteristics. A size 4 LMA was used in all patients and inserted by a single experienced anaesthesiologist. Oxygenation, overall success rate, insertion time, cuff pressure and resulting airway leak pressure were determined as well as a subjective assessment of handling and the incidence of sore throat, dysphagia and hoarseness. Time of insertion was shortest with the Ambu LM, while failure rates were comparable with the LMA-U, the Ambu LM and the Soft Seal LM (median 19 s; range 8-57 s; success rate 100% vs. 14; 8-35; 97% vs. 20; 12-46; 95%). Insertion was judged 'excellent' in 75% of patients in the LMA-U group, in 70% of patients in Ambu LM group and in 65% of patients in the Soft Seal LM group. There was no difference between devices with respect to postoperative airway morbidity at 6 h or 24 h following surgery. All three disposable devices were clinically suitable with respect to insertion times, success rates, oxygenation, airway and leak pressures, as well as to subjective handling and postoperative airway morbidity.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 048601070

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 16895620

DOI: 10.1017/S0265021506001219



Related references

Comparison of LMA Unique, Ambu laryngeal mask and Soft Seal laryngeal mask during routine surgical procedures. European Journal of Anaesthesiology 24(9): 812-813, 2007

Randomised Comparison of the AMBU AuraOnce Laryngeal Mask and the LMA Unique Laryngeal Mask Airway in Spontaneously Breathing Adults. Anesthesiology Research and Practice 2012: 405812-405812, 2012

The laryngeal mask airway Unique(TM) versus the Soft Seal(TM) laryngeal mask: A randomized, crossover study in paralyzed, anesthetized patients. Anesthesia and Analgesia 99(5): 1560-1563, 2004

The laryngeal mask airway Unique versus the Soft Seal laryngeal mask: a randomized, crossover study in paralyzed, anesthetized patients. Anesthesia and Analgesia 99(5): 1560-3; Table of Contents, 2004

Randomised crossover comparison of the Ambu AuraOnce Laryngeal Mask with the LMA Classic laryngeal mask airway in paralysed anaesthetised patients. Anaesthesia 63(1): 82-85, 2007

Comparison of classic laryngeal mask airway with Ambu laryngeal mask for tracheal tube exchange: A prospective randomized controlled study. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia 57(3): 259-264, 2013

A comparison of the disposable Ambu AuraOnce Laryngeal Mask with the reusable LMA Classic laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia 62(7): 719-722, 2007

A comparison of the laryngeal tube with the laryngeal mask airway during routine surgical procedures. Anesthesia and Analgesia 95(4): 1094-7, Table of Contents, 2002

A comparison of the oropharyngeal leak pressure between the reusable Classic laryngeal mask airway and the single-use Soft Seal laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care 34(2): 237-239, 2006

A comparison of the proseal laryngeal mask airway, the laryngeal tube S and the oesophageal-tracheal combitube during routine surgical procedures. European Journal of Anaesthesiology 22(5): 341-346, 2005

A comparison of the proseal laryngeal mask airway (TM), the laryngeal tube S (R) o and the oesophageal-tracheal combitube (TM) during routine surgical procedures. European Journal of Anaesthesiology 22(5): 341-346, 2005

Clinical comparison of the reusable LMA Classic laryngeal mask and the disposable Soft Seal mask in adult patients. Revista Espanola de Anestesiologia Y Reanimacion 54(8): 462-468, 2007

Successful intubation in a difficult case using an Ambu Laryngeal Mask Angle Type-i, and the ability to pass a gastric tube behind the laryngeal mask. Masui. Japanese Journal of Anesthesiology 63(5): 545-547, 2014

Comparison of laryngeal mask airway Supreme and laryngeal mask airway Pro-Seal for controlled ventilation during general anaesthesia in adult patients: systematic review with meta-analysis. European Journal of Anaesthesiology 31(5): 266-273, 2014

Positive pressure ventilation during fibreoptic intubation: comparison of the laryngeal mask airway, intubating laryngeal mask and endoscopy mask techniques. British Journal of Anaesthesia 88(2): 246-254, 2002