• M J Paech, J Lain, W R Garrett, G Gillespie, K J Stannard, and D A Doherty.
• Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Management, King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, W.A.
• Anaesth Intensive Care. 2004 Feb 1;32(1):66-72.

AbstractA number of laryngeal masks are available, including both re-usable and single-use masks. Single-use laryngeal masks may decrease the risk of transmitting prion infections. We performed a single-blind randomized trial in 200 spontaneously breathing female patients under general anaesthesia with nitrous oxide, to compare a new single-use laryngeal mask, the SoftSeal (Portex Ltd, U.K.), with a re-usable laryngeal mask, the LMA Classic (Laryngeal Mask Company Ltd., Cyprus). The primary outcome was successful insertion at the first attempt. Size 4 single-use (n = 99) or re-usable (n = 100) laryngeal masks, inserted by experienced anaesthetists, were equivalent for successful placement at the first attempt (90% versus 91% respectively). The single-use mask was less easy to insert (47% difficult versus 9%, P < 0.001). Clinical and anatomical tests of position and function were similar. The cuff pressure of the re-usable mask increased significantly compared with the single-use mask (median +10 cm versus -2 cm H2O, P < 0.001). Forty per cent of patients allocated the single-use mask and 20% of those allocated the re-usable mask experienced sore throat at 24 hours postoperatively (P < 0.05). An estimation of cost per patient use was greater for the re-usable mask. We conclude that the SoftSeal single-use laryngeal mask and the LMA Classic re-usable laryngeal mask airway are of similar clinical utility in terms of successful insertion and airway maintenance. The re-usable laryngeal mask was easier to insert and associated with less postoperative sore throat, but costs were higher.

18 keywords...

hide…