Airway Management Using LMA‐Evaluation of Two Insertional Techniques: A Prospective Randomised Study

Abstract:
The laryngeal mask airway (LMA), originally conceived
as a component of anesthesiologists' airway armamentarium, has now become an
indispensable airway adjunct for a broad spectrum of healthcare providers,
extending to paramedics managing out-of-hospital cardiac arrest scenarios. his
randomized trial compares the success rates of the traditional digital
technique versus the 180-degree rotational technique for LMA insertion in
patients undergoing superficial surgeries under general anesthesia. After
ethical approval and informed consent, 120 healthy adults (ASA grade I-II, ages
18-65) scheduled for superficial surgeries were enrolled. Based on a pilot
study, 52 cases per group were needed, with an additional 15% to account for
dropouts, resulting in 60 participants per group. Exclusion criteria included
emergency surgery, obesity, reflux disease, and procedures requiring prone
positioning or lasting over an hour. No significant demographic or clinical
differences were found between Group A (standard technique) and Group B
(180-degree technique). The success rates were similar between the two
techniques. However, the 180-degree technique may provide better oropharyngeal
leak pressure, improving airway sealing and ventilation.
References:
[1]. Pennant, J.H., Walker, M.B., 1992. Comparison of the Endotracheal Tube and Laryngeal Mask in
Airway Management by Paramedical Personnel,
Anesthesia & Analgesia,74, 531-534.
[2]. Eglen, M., Kuvaki, B.,
Günenç, F., Ozbilgin, S., Küçükgüçlü, S., Polat, E., et al., 2017. Comparação de três técnicas
diferentes de inserção com a máscara laríngea LMA‐UniqueTM em
adultos, resultados de um estudo randômico. Brazilian Journal of
Anesthesiology, 67, 521–526.
[3]. Yu, S.H.,
Beirne, O.R.,2010. Laryngeal Mask Airways Have a Lower Risk of Airway
Complications Compared With Endotracheal Intubation: A Systematic Review.
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 68, 2359–2376.
[4]. Haghighi, M.,
Mohammadzadeh, A., Naderi, B., Seddighinejad, A., Movahedi, H.,2010.
Comparing two methods of LMA insertion; classic versus simplified (airway).
Middle East J Anaesthesiol,20,509–514.
[5]. Brimacombe, J.,
Berry, A., 1993. Insertion of the Laryngeal Mask Airway—A Prospective Study of Four
Techniques. Anaesth Intensive Care, 21,
89–92.
[6]. Hwang, J., Park, H.P., Lim, Y.J., Do, S.H., Lee, S.C., Jeon, Y.T., 2009. Comparison of Two Insertion Techniques of ProSealTM
Laryngeal Mask Airway. Anesthesiology, 110,
905–907.
[7]. Asai, T.,
Brimacom, J., 2000. Cuff volume and size selection with the laryngeal mask.
Anaesthesia, 55, 1179–1184.
[8]. Tan, Y.,
Jiang, J., Wan,
R., 2022. Contrast of oropharyngeal leak
pressure and clinical performance of I-gelTM and LMA ProSealTM
in patients: A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE,
17, e0278871.
[9]. An, J., Shin, S.K., Kim,
K.J., 2013.
Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion in Adults: Comparison between Fully Deflated
and Partially Inflated Technique. Yonsei Med J, 54, 747.
[10]. Shyam, T.,
Selvaraj, V., 2021. Airway management using
LMA-evaluation of three insertional techniques-a prospective randomised study.
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol, 37,108.
[11]. Na, H.S., Jeon,
Y.T, Shin, H.J.,
Oh, A.Y., Park, H.P., Hwang. J.W., 2015.
Effect of Paralysis at the Time of ProSeal Laryngeal
Mask Airway Insertion on Pharyngolaryngeal Morbidities. A Randomized Trial.
Langevin SM. editor. PLoS ONE, 10, e0134130.
[12]. Koo, B.W., Oh, A.Y., Hwang, J.W., Na, H.S., Min, S.W., 2019. Comparison of
standard versus 90° rotation technique for LMA FlexibleTM insertion:
a randomized controlled trial. BMC Anesthesiol, 19, 95.
[13]. Soh, C.R., Ng,
A.S.B., 2001.
Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion in Paediatric Anaesthesia: Comparison between
the Reverse and Standard Techniques. Anaesth Intensive Care, 29, 515–519.
[14]. Nakayama, S., Osaka, Y.,
Yamashita. M., 2002. The
rotational technique with a partially inflated laryngeal mask airway improves
the ease of insertion in children. Pediatric Anesthesia, 12, 416–419.
[15]. Park, J.H., Lee,
J.S., Nam, S.B.,
Ju, J.W., Kim, M.S., 2016. Standard versus
Rotation Technique for Insertion of Supraglottic Airway Devices: Systematic
Review and Meta-Analysis. Yonsei Med J,57,987.
[16]. Aghamohammadi, D., Eydi,
M., Hosseinzadeh, H., Amiri Rahimi,
M., Golzari, S., 2013. Assessment of Mini-dose
Succinylcholine Effect on Facilitating Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion. Journal
of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Research, 5,
17-20.
[17]. Keller, C.,
Brimacombe, J., 1999. The Influence of Head and Neck Position on Oropharyngeal
Leak Pressure and Cuff Position with the Flexible and the Standard Laryngeal
Mask Airway. Anesthesia & Analgesia,
88, 913–916.
[18]. Dingley, J., Whitehead, S.,
Green, S., Bayley, E., 2009. A randomised controlled trial to compare the classic laryngeal
mask airway with the i-gel airway in spontaneously breathing anaesthetised
patients. Anaesthesia, 64, 674–678.
[19]. Yu, S.H., Beirne, O.R., 2010. Laryngeal Mask
Airways Have a Lower Risk of Airway Complications Compared With Endotracheal
Intubation: A Systematic Review. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 68, 2359–2376.
[20]. Brain, A.I.J.,
McGhee, T.D., McAteer, E.J., Thomas, A., Abu-Saad, M.A., Bushman, J.A., 1985. The Laryngeal Mask Airway. Development and Preliminary
Trials of a New Type of Airway. Anaesthesia, 40,
356–361.