» Articles » PMID: 19095838

The Influence of Head and Neck Position on the Oropharyngeal Leak Pressure and Cuff Position of Three Supraglottic Airway Devices

Overview
Journal Anesth Analg
Specialty Anesthesiology
Date 2008 Dec 20
PMID 19095838
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: With supraglottic airway devices, such as the laryngeal tube suction (LTS), ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) and Cobra perilaryngeal airway (CobraPLA), oropharyngeal leak pressure or cuff position may vary according to changes in the position of the head and neck. We evaluated oropharyngeal leak pressure and cuff pressure of the PLMA, LTS, and CobraPLA in different head and neck positions.

Methods: One-hundred-thirty-nine patients (aged 18-70 yr) scheduled for minor surgical procedures were randomly allocated to one of the supraglottic airway devices. Oropharyngeal leak pressure and cuff pressure were evaluated in four head and neck positions: neutral, 45 degrees of flexion, 45 degrees of extension, and 45 degrees of right rotation. Adverse events (i.e., difficulty in ventilation or gastric insufflation) were assessed during the study.

Results: Leak pressures of the PLMA were lowest in the extension (18.5 vs 23.9 and 26.8 cm H(2)O of LTS and CobraPLA, respectively; P < 0.001) and in the rotation position (25.0 vs 29.4 and 28.5 cm H(2)O of LTS and CobraPLA, respectively; P < 0.005). With the CobraPLA, gastric insufflations occurred before the oropharyngeal leak in 37 of 45 patients. There were ventilatory difficulties in seven patients with LTS after neck flexion, which required tracheal intubation.

Conclusions: The PLMA showed significantly lower oropharyngeal leak pressures than did the LTS or CobraPLA in the neck extension and rotation positions. Caution is warranted when changing the position of the head and neck when using the Cobra-PLA or LTS as gastric insufflation or ventilatory difficulty may occur.

Citing Articles

Comparison between Air-Q Self Pressurized Airway Device with Blocker and Proseal Laryngeal Mask Airway in anesthetized paralyzed adult female patients undergoing elective gynecological operations.

Ismail Youssef M, Dobal N, Hammad Y, El-Refai N, Abdelrahman R Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2024; 56(2):108-120.

PMID: 39166502 PMC: 11284585. DOI: 10.5114/ait.2024.141203.


Comparing leak pressure of LMA ProSeal™ versus i-gel at head rotation: a randomized controlled trial.

Chaki T, Koizumi M, Tachibana S, Matsumoto T, Kumagai T, Hashimoto Y Can J Anaesth. 2023; 71(1):66-76.

PMID: 38017196 DOI: 10.1007/s12630-023-02648-3.


Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure of LMA Protector and LMA-ProSeal in different head and neck positions in anaesthetized and paralyzed patients; A prospective randomized study.

Kerai S, Bhatt G, Saxena K, Gaba P, Wadhwa B Indian J Anaesth. 2023; 67(2):201-206.

PMID: 37091441 PMC: 10121088. DOI: 10.4103/ija.ija_371_22.


A Prospective Randomized Study for the Placement of Flexible Laryngeal Airway Mask with Two-Step of Jaw-Thrust Technique by Both Hands for Adults.

Wan Y, Liu Y, Xi C, Cui X, Wang G Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2023; 75(1):32-38.

PMID: 37007892 PMC: 10050500. DOI: 10.1007/s12070-022-03099-w.


Comparison of McGrath videolaryngoscope-assisted insertion versus standard blind technique for flexible laryngeal mask airway insertion in adults.

Yoo J, Kwak H, Ha E, Min S, Kim J Singapore Med J. 2022; 63(6):342-344.

PMID: 36043315 PMC: 9329548. DOI: 10.11622/smedj.2022080.