Cargando…

A comparison of fiberoptical guided tracheal intubation via laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube

BACKGROUND: Fiberoptical assisted intubation via a placed laryngeal mask airway (LMA) has been described as save and easy procedure to manage a difficult airway. The laryngeal tube (LT) is a promising alternative to the LMA as supraglottic airway device. Fiberoptical assisted intubation via LT is po...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Metterlein, Thomas, Plank, Christoph, Sinner, Barbara, Bundscherer, Anika, Graf, Bernhard M., Roth, Gabriel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4279348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25558197
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.146285
_version_ 1782350670078148608
author Metterlein, Thomas
Plank, Christoph
Sinner, Barbara
Bundscherer, Anika
Graf, Bernhard M.
Roth, Gabriel
author_facet Metterlein, Thomas
Plank, Christoph
Sinner, Barbara
Bundscherer, Anika
Graf, Bernhard M.
Roth, Gabriel
author_sort Metterlein, Thomas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Fiberoptical assisted intubation via a placed laryngeal mask airway (LMA) has been described as save and easy procedure to manage a difficult airway. The laryngeal tube (LT) is a promising alternative to the LMA as supraglottic airway device. Fiberoptical assisted intubation via LT is possible, however considered more difficult. The aim of this study was to compare the fiberoptical assisted intubation via LT and LMA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 22 anesthesiologists with different levels of experience participated in the study performed on an adult airway model. Primarily the supraglottic device was placed and correct position was confirmed by successful ventilation. A 5 mm internal diameter tracheal tube was loaded onto a flexible 3.6 mm fiberscope and the so prepared device was inserted into the proximal lumen of the LMA or the LT. The glottis was passed under visual control and the tube advanced into the trachea. After removal of the fiberscope, ventilation was examined clinically by inspection. Success rates, procedure time and observed complications of LMA versus LT were compared (U-test; P < 0.05). RESULTS: Placement of the endotracheal tube was successful in all attempts using both the LMA and LT. There was no difference in the time needed for the placement procedure (33 [26-38] s LMA; 35 [32-38] s LT). Only minor technical complications were observed in both groups. CONCLUSION: A fiberoptical assisted intubation via LT can be considered as a relevant alternative in advanced airway management.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4279348
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42793482015-01-02 A comparison of fiberoptical guided tracheal intubation via laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube Metterlein, Thomas Plank, Christoph Sinner, Barbara Bundscherer, Anika Graf, Bernhard M. Roth, Gabriel Saudi J Anaesth Original Article BACKGROUND: Fiberoptical assisted intubation via a placed laryngeal mask airway (LMA) has been described as save and easy procedure to manage a difficult airway. The laryngeal tube (LT) is a promising alternative to the LMA as supraglottic airway device. Fiberoptical assisted intubation via LT is possible, however considered more difficult. The aim of this study was to compare the fiberoptical assisted intubation via LT and LMA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 22 anesthesiologists with different levels of experience participated in the study performed on an adult airway model. Primarily the supraglottic device was placed and correct position was confirmed by successful ventilation. A 5 mm internal diameter tracheal tube was loaded onto a flexible 3.6 mm fiberscope and the so prepared device was inserted into the proximal lumen of the LMA or the LT. The glottis was passed under visual control and the tube advanced into the trachea. After removal of the fiberscope, ventilation was examined clinically by inspection. Success rates, procedure time and observed complications of LMA versus LT were compared (U-test; P < 0.05). RESULTS: Placement of the endotracheal tube was successful in all attempts using both the LMA and LT. There was no difference in the time needed for the placement procedure (33 [26-38] s LMA; 35 [32-38] s LT). Only minor technical complications were observed in both groups. CONCLUSION: A fiberoptical assisted intubation via LT can be considered as a relevant alternative in advanced airway management. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4279348/ /pubmed/25558197 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.146285 Text en Copyright: © Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Metterlein, Thomas
Plank, Christoph
Sinner, Barbara
Bundscherer, Anika
Graf, Bernhard M.
Roth, Gabriel
A comparison of fiberoptical guided tracheal intubation via laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube
title A comparison of fiberoptical guided tracheal intubation via laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube
title_full A comparison of fiberoptical guided tracheal intubation via laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube
title_fullStr A comparison of fiberoptical guided tracheal intubation via laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of fiberoptical guided tracheal intubation via laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube
title_short A comparison of fiberoptical guided tracheal intubation via laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube
title_sort comparison of fiberoptical guided tracheal intubation via laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4279348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25558197
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.146285
work_keys_str_mv AT metterleinthomas acomparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT plankchristoph acomparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT sinnerbarbara acomparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT bundschereranika acomparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT grafbernhardm acomparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT rothgabriel acomparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT metterleinthomas comparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT plankchristoph comparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT sinnerbarbara comparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT bundschereranika comparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT grafbernhardm comparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube
AT rothgabriel comparisonoffiberopticalguidedtrachealintubationvialaryngealmaskandlaryngealtube