ISCATECH   Bedoukian   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Chemtica
Biochemtech
AlphaScents
U-Chemo
BIOHOME
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous AbstractOn the determination of fiber tilt angles in fiber diffraction    Next AbstractMeasurement of optic disc parameters on digital fundus photographs: algorithm development and evaluation »

Anaesthesia


Title:The laryngeal mask airway Supreme--a single use laryngeal mask airway with an oesophageal vent. A randomised, cross-over study with the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal in paralysed, anaesthetised patients
Author(s):Eschertzhuber, S. Brimacombe, J. Hohlrieder, M. Keller, C.
Address:Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Year:2009 Jan
Journal Title:Anaesthesia
Page Number:79-83
Language:eng
Volume:64
Issue:1
ISSN/ISBN:1365-2044 (Electronic). 0003-2409 (Linking)
Abstract:The LMA Supreme is a new extraglottic airway device which brings together features of the LMA ProSeal, Fastrach and Unique. We test the hypothesis that ease of insertion, oropharyngeal leak pressure, fibreoptic position and ease of gastric tube placement differ between the LMA ProSeal and the LMA Supreme in paralysed anesthetised patients. Ninety-three females aged 19-71 years were studied. Both devices were inserted into each patient in random order. Two attempts were allowed. Digital insertion was used for the first attempt and guided insertion for the second attempt. Oropharyngeal leak pressure and fibreoptic position were determined during cuff inflation from 0 to 40 ml in 10 ml increments. Gastric tube insertion was attempted if there was no gas leak from the drain tube. First attempt and overall insertion success were similar (LMA ProSeal, 92% and 100%; LMA Supreme 95% and 100%). Guided insertion was always successful following failed digital insertion. Oropharyngeal leak pressure was 4-8 ml higher for the LMA ProSeal over the inflation range (p < 0.001). Intracuff pressure was 16-35 cm higher for the LMA ProSeal when the cuff volume was 20-40 ml (p < 0.001). There was an increase in oropharyngeal leak pressure with increasing cuff volume from 10 to 30 ml for both devices, but no change from 0 to 10 ml and 30-40 ml. There were no differences in the fibreoptic position of the airway or drain tube. The first attempt and overall insertion success for the gastric tube was similar (LMA ProSeal 91% and 100%; LMA Supreme 92% and 100%). We conclude that ease of insertion, gastric tube placement and fibreoptic position are similar for the LMA ProSeal and LMA Supreme in paralysed, anaesthetised females, but oropharyngeal leak pressure and intracuff pressure are higher for the LMA ProSeal.

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2021. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2021 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 15-01-2021