• J Brimacombe and C Keller.
• Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Cairns Base Hospital, Cairns, Queensland.
• Anaesth Intensive Care. 2004 Oct 1;32(5):681-4.

AbstractWe tested the hypothesis that gum elastic-bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway is more frequently successful than introducer tool guided insertion after failed digital insertion. One hundred anaesthetized patients (ASA 1-2, aged 18 to 80 years) were randomized for the second insertion attempt using either the gum elastic bougie-guided or introducer tool techniques. The bougie-guided technique involved priming the drain tube with the bougie, placing the bougie in the oesophagus using laryngoscope guidance, digital insertion along the palato-pharyngeal curve, and bougie removal. The introducer tool technique involved attaching the introducer tool, single-handed rotation along the palatopharyngeal curve, and introducer tool removal. Failed insertion was classified as (i) failed passage into the pharynx, (ii) malposition, or (iii) ineffective ventilation. Any blood staining was documented. Insertion was more frequently successful (50/50 vs 15/50, P=0.0002) and faster (35+/-17 s vs 54+/-45 s, mean+/-SD, P=0.006) with the bougie-guided technique. All failed insertions with the introducer tool technique were successful with the bougie-guided technique. The aetiology of failed insertion was similar for the digital and introducer tool techniques in 94% (33/35) of patients. There was no blood staining on the bougie, laryngoscope or introducer tool at removal, but blood staining was more common on the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway with the introducer tool technique (9/50 vs 2/50, P=0.03). We conclude that the gum elastic bougie-guided insertion has a higher success rate and causes less trauma than the insertion tool insertion technique after failed digital insertion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway.

25 keywords...

hide…