Abstract

BackgroundFiberoptical assisted intubation via placed supraglottic airway devices has been described as safe and easy procedure to manage difficult airways. However visualization of the glottis aperture is essential for fiberoptical assisted intubation. Various different supraglottic airway devices are commercially available and might offer different conditions for fiberoptical assisted intubation. The aim of this study was to compare the best obtainable view of the glottic aperture using different supraglottic airway devices. MethodsWith approval of the local ethics committee 52 adult patients undergoing elective anesthesia were randomly assigned to a supraglottic airway device (Laryngeal Tube, Laryngeal Mask Airway I-Gel, Laryngeal Mask Airway Unique, Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme, Laryngeal Mask Airway Aura-once). After standardized induction of anesthesia the supraglottic airway device was placed according to the manufacturers recommendations. After successful ventilation the position of the supraglottic airway device in regard to the glottic opening was examined with a flexible fiberscope. A fully or partially visible glottic aperture was considered as suitable for fiberoptical assisted intubation. Suitability for fiberoptical assisted intubation was compared between the groups (H-test, U-test; p<0.05). ResultsDemographic data was not different between the groups. Placement of the supraglottic airway device and adequate ventilation was successful in all attempts. Glottic view suitable for fiberoptical assisted intubation differed between the devices ranging from 40% for the laringeal tube (LT), 66% for the laryngeal mask airway Supreme, 70% for the Laryngeal Mask Airway I-Gel and 90% for both the Laryngeal Mask Airway Unique and the Laryngeal Mask Airway Aura-once. ConclusionNone of the used supraglottic airway devices offered a full or partial glottic view in all cases. However the Laryngeal Mask Airway Unique and the Laryngeal Mask Airway Aura-once seem to be more suitable for fiberoptical assisted intubation compared to other devices.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.