• K Schebesta, V Lorenz, E M Schebesta, K Hörauf, M Gruber, O Kimberger, A Chiari, M Frass, and P Krafft.
• Department of Anaesthesia, General Intensive Care and Pain Management, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. karl.schebesta@meduniwien.ac.at
• Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2010 Aug 1;54(7):848-54.

BackgroundTo prospectively investigate the performance, sealing capacity and operating room (OR) staff exposure to waste anaesthetic gases during the use of the Cobra perilaryngeal airway (CobraPLA) compared with the laryngeal mask airway classic (LMA).MethodsSixty patients were randomly assigned to the CobraPLA or the LMA group. Insertion time, number of insertion attempts and airway leak pressures were assessed after induction of anaesthesia. Occupational exposure to nitrous oxide (N(2)O) and Sevoflurane (SEV) was measured at the anaesthetists' breathing zone and the patients' mouth using a photoacoustic infrared spectrometer.ResultsN(2)O waste gas concentrations differed significantly in the anaesthetist's breathing zone (11.7+/-7.2 p.p.m. in CobraPLA vs. 4.1+/-4.3 p.p.m. in LMA, P=0.03), whereas no difference could be shown in SEV concentrations. Correct CobraPLA positioning was possible in 28 out of 30 patients (more than one attempt necessary in five patients). Correct positioning of the LMA classic was possible in all 30 patients (more than one attempt in three patients). Peak airway pressure was higher in the CobraPLA group (16+/-3 vs. 14+/-2 cmH(2)O, P=0.01). The average leak pressure of the CobraPLA was 24+/-4 cmH(2)O, compared with 20+/-4 cmH(2)O of the LMA classic (P<0.001; all values means+/-SD).ConclusionDespite higher airway seal pressures, the CobraPLA caused higher intraoperative N(2)O trace concentrations in the anaesthetists' breathing zone.

27 keywords...

hide…