Anesthesiology
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial
Pharyngolaryngeal, neck, and jaw discomfort after anesthesia with the face mask and laryngeal mask airway at high and low cuff volumes in males and females.
There is controversy over (1) the relative incidence of sore throat between the face mask (FM) and laryngeal mask airway (LMA), (2) the efficacy of LMA intracuff pressure reduction as a mechanism for minimizing sore throat, and (3) the relative incidence of sore throat with the LMA between males and females. In a randomized double-blind study, the authors compared laryngopharyngeal, neck, and jaw discomfort with the FM and LMA at high and low cuff volumes in males and females. ⋯ The LMA causes more sore throat and dysphagia but less jaw pain than the FM. Sore throat and dysphagia are more common with the LMA if the initial cuff volume is high. There are no differences in discomfort levels between males and females. However, these discomforts do not influence patient satisfaction after LMA or FM anesthesia.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial
The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: A randomized, crossover study with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed, anesthetized patients.
The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is a new laryngeal mask device with a modified cuff to improve seal and a drainage tube to provide a channel for regurgitated fluid and gastric tube placement. In the present randomized, crossover study, the authors tested the hypothesis that ease of insertion, airway sealing pressure, and fiberoptic position differ between the PLMA and the standard laryngeal mask airway (LMA). For the PLMA, we also assess ease of gastric tube placement and the efficacy of an introducer tool. ⋯ The PLMA is capable of achieving a more effective seal than the LMA and facilitates gastric tube placement, but it is more difficult to insert unless an introducer tool is used. When correctly positioned, the PLMA isolates the glottis from the upper esophagus with possible implications for airway protection.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial
Differences in cardiovascular response to airway stimulation at different sites and blockade of the responses by lidocaine.
Mechanical stimulation of the airways elicits abrupt cardiovascular responses (CVR) in anesthetized humans. We examined a potential difference in such responses by comparing changes in heart rate (HR) and arterial blood pressure (AP) responses to mechanical stimulation of three different parts of the airways, as well as the effects of localized airway anesthesia with lidocaine on these responses. ⋯ We found that CVRs to tactile stimulation differ in their magnitude at three different sites within the airways, and localized anesthesia with lidocaine can abolish these responses in humans. The inhibition of lidocaine could be mainly due to direct blockade of the mechanoreceptors of the airways and partly to its systemic effect.