4.4 Article

Clinical performance of the LMA Protector™ airway in moderately obese patients

Journal

BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12871-020-01100-z

Keywords

Supraglottic airway devices; Moderately obese; Oropharyngeal leak pressures; Airway management

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The 4th National Audit Project of The Royal College of Anaesthetists and The Difficult Airway Society (NAP4) reported a higher incidence of supraglottic airway device (SAD) related pulmonary aspiration in obese patients especially with the first-generation SADs. The latest single-use SAD, the Protector (TM) provides a functional separation of the respiratory and digestive tracts and its laryngeal cuff with two ports allowing additional suction in tandem with the insertion of a gastric tube. The laryngeal cuff of LMA Protector (TM) allows a large catchment reservoir in the event of gastric content aspiration. Methods: We evaluated the performance characteristics of the LMA Protector (TM) in 30 unparalysed, moderately obese patients. First attempt insertion rate, time for insertion, oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), and incidence of complications were recorded. Results: We found high first and second attempt insertion rates of 28(93%) and 1(33%) respectively, with one failed attempt where no capnography trace could be detected, presumably from a downfolded device tip. The LMA Protector (TM) was inserted rapidly in 21.0(4.0) seconds and demonstrated high OLP of 31.8(5.4) cmH2O. Fibreoptic assessment showed a clear view of vocal cords in 93%. The incidence of blood staining on removal of device was 48%, postoperative sore throat 27%, dysphagia 10% and dysphonia 20% (all self-limiting, resolving a few hours postoperatively). Conclusions: We conclude that the LMA Protector (TM) was associated with easy, expedient first attempt insertion success, demonstrating high oropharyngeal pressures and good anatomical position in the moderately obese population, with relatively low postoperative airway morbidity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available