» Articles » PMID: 20640203

Troubleshooting ProSeal LMA

Overview
Specialty Anesthesiology
Date 2010 Jul 20
PMID 20640203
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Supraglottic devices have changed the face of the airway management. These devices have contributed in a big way in airway management especially, in the difficult airway scenario significantly decreasing the pharyngolaryngeal morbidity. There is a plethora of these devices, which has been well matched by their wider acceptance in clinical practice. ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is one such frequently used device employed for spontaneous as well as controlled ventilation. However, the use of PLMA at times maybe associated with certain problems. Some of the problems related with its use are unique while others are akin to the classic laryngeal mask airway (cLMA). However, expertise is needed for its safe and judicious use, correct placement, recognition and management of its various malpositions and complications. The present article describes the tests employed for proper confirmation of placement to assess the ventilatory and the drain tube functions of the mask, diagnosis of various malpositions and the management of these aspects. All these areas have been highlighted under the heading of troubleshooting PLMA. Many problems can be solved by proper patient and procedure selection, maintaining adequate depth of anaesthesia, diagnosis and management of malpositions. Proper fixation of the device and monitoring cuff pressure intraoperatively may bring down the incidence of airway morbidity.

Citing Articles

Comparison of gum elastic bougie-guided insertion of LMA Protector versus the conventional method in achieving oesophagal patency - A randomised comparative study.

Kerai S, Prathap T, Bhatt G, Gaba P, Gupta L, Saxena K Indian J Anaesth. 2024; 67(Suppl 4):S238-S244.

PMID: 38187978 PMC: 10768917. DOI: 10.4103/ija.ija_604_23.


Evaluating the Optimal Operating Table Height for ProSeal-LMA™ Insertion.

Low S, Masdar A, Md Nor N, Mohd Azidin A, Low H, Mohamad Mahdi S Int J Clin Pract. 2022; 2022:5118362.

PMID: 36474553 PMC: 9691322. DOI: 10.1155/2022/5118362.


How Much Is Too Much in a Reusable Laryngeal Mask Airway?.

Arya A, Turki S, Kajal K Cureus. 2022; 14(9):e28921.

PMID: 36237751 PMC: 9547381. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.28921.


To compare clinical versus ultrasound assessment of correct placement of ProSeal Laryngeal mask airway (PLMA): a prospective randomized study.

Rustagi K, Garg R, Bharti S, Kumar V, Gupta N, Mishra S J Clin Monit Comput. 2021; 36(2):529-535.

PMID: 33725219 DOI: 10.1007/s10877-021-00684-2.


Evaluation of Different Positive End-Expiratory Pressures Using Supreme™ Airway Laryngeal Mask during Minor Surgical Procedures in Children.

Fiedler M, Schatzle E, Contzen M, Gernoth C, Weiss C, Walter T Medicina (Kaunas). 2020; 56(10).

PMID: 33096743 PMC: 7589667. DOI: 10.3390/medicina56100551.


References
1.
OConnor Jr C, Stix M, Valade D . Glottic insertion of the ProSeal LMA occurs in 6% of cases: a review of 627 patients. Can J Anaesth. 2005; 52(2):199-204. DOI: 10.1007/BF03027729. View

2.
Keller C, Brimacombe J, Kleinsasser A, Brimacombe L . The Laryngeal Mask Airway ProSeal(TM) as a temporary ventilatory device in grossly and morbidly obese patients before laryngoscope-guided tracheal intubation. Anesth Analg. 2002; 94(3):737-40; table of contents. DOI: 10.1097/00000539-200203000-00048. View

3.
Wafai Y, Salem M, Baraka A, Joseph N, Czinn E, Paulissian R . Effectiveness of the self-inflating bulb for verification of proper placement of the Esophageal Tracheal Combitube. Anesth Analg. 1995; 80(1):122-6. DOI: 10.1097/00000539-199501000-00021. View

4.
Christodoulou C . ProSeal laryngeal mask airway foldover detection. Anesth Analg. 2004; 99(1):312-313. DOI: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000127714.32845.7F. View

5.
Brimacombe J, Keller C, Fullekrug B, Agro F, Rosenblatt W, Dierdorf S . A multicenter study comparing the ProSeal and Classic laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized, nonparalyzed patients. Anesthesiology. 2002; 96(2):289-95. DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200202000-00011. View