Cargando…
LMA® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study
BACKGROUND: Laryngeal masks airway (LMA) has been increasingly used in surgical patients. However, the use of LMA in laparoscopic surgeries remains controversial. The major concerns include the potential risk of esophageal regurgitation, aspiration, and difficulties to achieve effective ventilation....
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8686540/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34930137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-021-01535-y |
_version_ | 1784618035895599104 |
---|---|
author | Liu, Yanhong Song, Yuxiang Wang, Miaomiao Yang, Meihua Shen, Hao Wang, Zhen Chen, Liyong Yang, Jianjun Gong, Shengkai Yu, Yonghao Shi, Zhao Zhang, Wei Zou, Xuli Sun, Xude Wang, Yuan Fu, Qiang Cao, Jiangbei Mi, Weidong |
author_facet | Liu, Yanhong Song, Yuxiang Wang, Miaomiao Yang, Meihua Shen, Hao Wang, Zhen Chen, Liyong Yang, Jianjun Gong, Shengkai Yu, Yonghao Shi, Zhao Zhang, Wei Zou, Xuli Sun, Xude Wang, Yuan Fu, Qiang Cao, Jiangbei Mi, Weidong |
author_sort | Liu, Yanhong |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Laryngeal masks airway (LMA) has been increasingly used in surgical patients. However, the use of LMA in laparoscopic surgeries remains controversial. The major concerns include the potential risk of esophageal regurgitation, aspiration, and difficulties to achieve effective ventilation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the LMA® Protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: Patients aged 18 to 70 years, scheduled for laparoscopic surgeries were included. The insertion time, successful insertion rate, and oropharyngeal leak pressure were measured. Airway complications and airway manipulations during the procedure were documented. Effective ventilation rate was calculated. Visible bloodstains and reflux content in the drainage channel were documented after the removal of LMA® Protector™. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were enrolled. The insertion of LMA® Protector™ failed in seven patients resulting with a successful insertion rate of 97.7%. During the maintenance of anesthesia, airway manipulation was required in 19 patients (19/293, 6.48%), in three of whom the LMA was replaced with endotracheal intubation resulting with an effective ventilation rate of 96.7% (290/300). The oropharyngeal leak pressure was 30.18 ± 5.88 cmH(2)O. Seventy-five patients (25.86%) reported mild sore throat on the first day after surgery. Bloodstains on study devices were noticed in 58 patients (20%). Seventy-five patients (25.86%) reported mild sore throat on the first day after surgery. Gastric reflux was noticed in the drainage tube in 5 patients (1.72%) with no signs of aspiration in any of those patients. CONCLUSIONS: The LMA® Protector™ was shown to be safe and effective in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries. Although minor complications that require no further treatment, no clinically diagnosed aspiration was noticed in our study. Gastric reflux was noticed in the drainage tube in five patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecology surgery. Further research is needed to verify whether LMA® Protector™ is suitable for procedures in Trendelenburg position or other situations that a high risk of gastroesophageal reflux exists. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1800018300, date of registration: September 2018). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8686540 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86865402021-12-20 LMA® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study Liu, Yanhong Song, Yuxiang Wang, Miaomiao Yang, Meihua Shen, Hao Wang, Zhen Chen, Liyong Yang, Jianjun Gong, Shengkai Yu, Yonghao Shi, Zhao Zhang, Wei Zou, Xuli Sun, Xude Wang, Yuan Fu, Qiang Cao, Jiangbei Mi, Weidong BMC Anesthesiol Research BACKGROUND: Laryngeal masks airway (LMA) has been increasingly used in surgical patients. However, the use of LMA in laparoscopic surgeries remains controversial. The major concerns include the potential risk of esophageal regurgitation, aspiration, and difficulties to achieve effective ventilation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the LMA® Protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: Patients aged 18 to 70 years, scheduled for laparoscopic surgeries were included. The insertion time, successful insertion rate, and oropharyngeal leak pressure were measured. Airway complications and airway manipulations during the procedure were documented. Effective ventilation rate was calculated. Visible bloodstains and reflux content in the drainage channel were documented after the removal of LMA® Protector™. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were enrolled. The insertion of LMA® Protector™ failed in seven patients resulting with a successful insertion rate of 97.7%. During the maintenance of anesthesia, airway manipulation was required in 19 patients (19/293, 6.48%), in three of whom the LMA was replaced with endotracheal intubation resulting with an effective ventilation rate of 96.7% (290/300). The oropharyngeal leak pressure was 30.18 ± 5.88 cmH(2)O. Seventy-five patients (25.86%) reported mild sore throat on the first day after surgery. Bloodstains on study devices were noticed in 58 patients (20%). Seventy-five patients (25.86%) reported mild sore throat on the first day after surgery. Gastric reflux was noticed in the drainage tube in 5 patients (1.72%) with no signs of aspiration in any of those patients. CONCLUSIONS: The LMA® Protector™ was shown to be safe and effective in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries. Although minor complications that require no further treatment, no clinically diagnosed aspiration was noticed in our study. Gastric reflux was noticed in the drainage tube in five patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecology surgery. Further research is needed to verify whether LMA® Protector™ is suitable for procedures in Trendelenburg position or other situations that a high risk of gastroesophageal reflux exists. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1800018300, date of registration: September 2018). BioMed Central 2021-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8686540/ /pubmed/34930137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-021-01535-y Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Liu, Yanhong Song, Yuxiang Wang, Miaomiao Yang, Meihua Shen, Hao Wang, Zhen Chen, Liyong Yang, Jianjun Gong, Shengkai Yu, Yonghao Shi, Zhao Zhang, Wei Zou, Xuli Sun, Xude Wang, Yuan Fu, Qiang Cao, Jiangbei Mi, Weidong LMA® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study |
title | LMA® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study |
title_full | LMA® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study |
title_fullStr | LMA® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study |
title_full_unstemmed | LMA® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study |
title_short | LMA® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study |
title_sort | lma® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8686540/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34930137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-021-01535-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liuyanhong lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT songyuxiang lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT wangmiaomiao lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT yangmeihua lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT shenhao lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT wangzhen lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT chenliyong lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT yangjianjun lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT gongshengkai lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT yuyonghao lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT shizhao lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT zhangwei lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT zouxuli lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT sunxude lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT wangyuan lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT fuqiang lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT caojiangbei lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy AT miweidong lmaprotectorinpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgeriesamulticenterprospectiveobservationalstudy |