Gum elastic bougie versus introducer tool for insertion of Pro-Seal LMA: A comparative study

Anitha Nileshwar, Sham Sunder Goyal

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: ProSeal LMA is useful in preventing aspiration of gastric contents. The correct position of its oesophageal lumen is important to prevent entry of these contents into the pharynx. In this randomized, controlled prospective study, we compared two techniques for insertion of ProSeal LMA. Patients & Methods: Sixty patients between 17-65 years, of either gender, undergoing minor surgical procedures were randomly allocated to have ProSeal LMA inserted either by Introducer tool (Group-IT, n = 30) or a gum elastic bougie (Group-GEB, n = 30). Results: The success rate for insertion of ProSeal LMA at first attempt was higher in the GEB-group compared to IT-group (96.67% vs 80%) although overall success was similar in both groups. The frequency of obtaining a Grade 1 or 2 fibreoptic view through the airway tube was significantly higher in the GEB-group (100%) than IT-group (86.2%). Successful placement of ProSeal LMA took longer time with the GEB (40.8 ± 13.6 s )compared to IT( 19.8 ± 12.4 s). Airway seal pressure, attempts at Ryle's tube insertion and incidence of complications was similar in the two groups. Conclusion: GEB-guided insertion achieves better placement and in the first attempt as compared to Introducer tool-guided insertion but takes a longer time.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)171-175
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology
Volume24
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 01-04-2008

Fingerprint

Gingiva
Minor Surgical Procedures
Gastrointestinal Contents
Pharynx
Prospective Studies
Pressure
Incidence
Pro Seal

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics(all)

Cite this

@article{ca510b21e9ed4b1f8a1482620cbd4a0c,
title = "Gum elastic bougie versus introducer tool for insertion of Pro-Seal LMA: A comparative study",
abstract = "Background: ProSeal LMA is useful in preventing aspiration of gastric contents. The correct position of its oesophageal lumen is important to prevent entry of these contents into the pharynx. In this randomized, controlled prospective study, we compared two techniques for insertion of ProSeal LMA. Patients & Methods: Sixty patients between 17-65 years, of either gender, undergoing minor surgical procedures were randomly allocated to have ProSeal LMA inserted either by Introducer tool (Group-IT, n = 30) or a gum elastic bougie (Group-GEB, n = 30). Results: The success rate for insertion of ProSeal LMA at first attempt was higher in the GEB-group compared to IT-group (96.67{\%} vs 80{\%}) although overall success was similar in both groups. The frequency of obtaining a Grade 1 or 2 fibreoptic view through the airway tube was significantly higher in the GEB-group (100{\%}) than IT-group (86.2{\%}). Successful placement of ProSeal LMA took longer time with the GEB (40.8 ± 13.6 s )compared to IT( 19.8 ± 12.4 s). Airway seal pressure, attempts at Ryle's tube insertion and incidence of complications was similar in the two groups. Conclusion: GEB-guided insertion achieves better placement and in the first attempt as compared to Introducer tool-guided insertion but takes a longer time.",
author = "Anitha Nileshwar and Goyal, {Sham Sunder}",
year = "2008",
month = "4",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "171--175",
journal = "Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology",
issn = "0970-9185",
publisher = "Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology",
number = "2",

}

Gum elastic bougie versus introducer tool for insertion of Pro-Seal LMA : A comparative study. / Nileshwar, Anitha; Goyal, Sham Sunder.

In: Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology, Vol. 24, No. 2, 01.04.2008, p. 171-175.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Gum elastic bougie versus introducer tool for insertion of Pro-Seal LMA

T2 - A comparative study

AU - Nileshwar, Anitha

AU - Goyal, Sham Sunder

PY - 2008/4/1

Y1 - 2008/4/1

N2 - Background: ProSeal LMA is useful in preventing aspiration of gastric contents. The correct position of its oesophageal lumen is important to prevent entry of these contents into the pharynx. In this randomized, controlled prospective study, we compared two techniques for insertion of ProSeal LMA. Patients & Methods: Sixty patients between 17-65 years, of either gender, undergoing minor surgical procedures were randomly allocated to have ProSeal LMA inserted either by Introducer tool (Group-IT, n = 30) or a gum elastic bougie (Group-GEB, n = 30). Results: The success rate for insertion of ProSeal LMA at first attempt was higher in the GEB-group compared to IT-group (96.67% vs 80%) although overall success was similar in both groups. The frequency of obtaining a Grade 1 or 2 fibreoptic view through the airway tube was significantly higher in the GEB-group (100%) than IT-group (86.2%). Successful placement of ProSeal LMA took longer time with the GEB (40.8 ± 13.6 s )compared to IT( 19.8 ± 12.4 s). Airway seal pressure, attempts at Ryle's tube insertion and incidence of complications was similar in the two groups. Conclusion: GEB-guided insertion achieves better placement and in the first attempt as compared to Introducer tool-guided insertion but takes a longer time.

AB - Background: ProSeal LMA is useful in preventing aspiration of gastric contents. The correct position of its oesophageal lumen is important to prevent entry of these contents into the pharynx. In this randomized, controlled prospective study, we compared two techniques for insertion of ProSeal LMA. Patients & Methods: Sixty patients between 17-65 years, of either gender, undergoing minor surgical procedures were randomly allocated to have ProSeal LMA inserted either by Introducer tool (Group-IT, n = 30) or a gum elastic bougie (Group-GEB, n = 30). Results: The success rate for insertion of ProSeal LMA at first attempt was higher in the GEB-group compared to IT-group (96.67% vs 80%) although overall success was similar in both groups. The frequency of obtaining a Grade 1 or 2 fibreoptic view through the airway tube was significantly higher in the GEB-group (100%) than IT-group (86.2%). Successful placement of ProSeal LMA took longer time with the GEB (40.8 ± 13.6 s )compared to IT( 19.8 ± 12.4 s). Airway seal pressure, attempts at Ryle's tube insertion and incidence of complications was similar in the two groups. Conclusion: GEB-guided insertion achieves better placement and in the first attempt as compared to Introducer tool-guided insertion but takes a longer time.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=45349086712&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=45349086712&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:45349086712

VL - 24

SP - 171

EP - 175

JO - Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology

JF - Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology

SN - 0970-9185

IS - 2

ER -