Gastric regurgitation in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopy with a laryngeal mask airway: a prospective observational study

Supreme laryngeal mask airway for cesarean section under general anesthesia: a 10-year retrospective cohort study

Background

Previous research showed the use of supraglottic airways in obstetric anesthesia. The relevant evidence of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) on maternal and neonatal outcomes is still limited. We aimed to assess the maternal and neonatal outcomes when the LMA Supreme was used for cesarean section under general anesthesia.

Methods

We included all patients who underwent general anesthesia for cesarean section between January 2010 and December 2019. Propensity score matching was used to reduce potential bias from non-random selection of airway intervention. The primary outcome was adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes defined as maternal regurgitation, aspiration, hypoxemia, and low neonatal Apgar scores. Secondary outcomes included patient admission to the intensive care unit, neonate required tracheal intubation, external cardiac massage, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit.

Results

A total of 723 patients were included in the analysis; of whom, 221 received Supreme laryngeal mask airway (LMA group) and 502 were intubated with an endotracheal tube (ETT group). After propensity score matching, 189 patients remained in each group. No episode of regurgitation and aspiration occurred in both groups. There was no difference in the rates of Apgar score below 7 at 1 min (14.3% LMA group vs. 15.3% ETT group, OR 0.931, 95% CI 0.574 to 1.510, P = 0.772) and 5 min (3.7% vs. 4.2%, OR 0.875, 95% CI 0.324 to 2.365, P = 0.792). No difference was observed in the secondary outcomes between the two groups.

Conclusion

The LMA Supreme was not associated with higher adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes when compared to an endotracheal tube for cesarean section under general anesthesia. It might be considered an alternative to tracheal intubation in obstetric practice.

LMA® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Laryngeal masks airway (LMA) has been increasingly used in surgical patients. However, the use of LMA in laparoscopic surgeries remains controversial. The major concerns include the potential risk of esophageal regurgitation, aspiration, and difficulties to achieve effective ventilation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the LMA® Protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

Patients aged 18 to 70 years, scheduled for laparoscopic surgeries were included. The insertion time, successful insertion rate, and oropharyngeal leak pressure were measured. Airway complications and airway manipulations during the procedure were documented. Effective ventilation rate was calculated. Visible bloodstains and reflux content in the drainage channel were documented after the removal of LMA® Protector™.

RESULTS

Three hundred patients were enrolled. The insertion of LMA® Protector™ failed in seven patients resulting with a successful insertion rate of 97.7%. During the maintenance of anesthesia, airway manipulation was required in 19 patients (19/293, 6.48%), in three of whom the LMA was replaced with endotracheal intubation resulting with an effective ventilation rate of 96.7% (290/300). The oropharyngeal leak pressure was 30.18 ± 5.88 cmH2O. Seventy-five patients (25.86%) reported mild sore throat on the first day after surgery. Bloodstains on study devices were noticed in 58 patients (20%). Seventy-five patients (25.86%) reported mild sore throat on the first day after surgery. Gastric reflux was noticed in the drainage tube in 5 patients (1.72%) with no signs of aspiration in any of those patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The LMA® Protector™ was shown to be safe and effective in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries. Although minor complications that require no further treatment, no clinically diagnosed aspiration was noticed in our study. Gastric reflux was noticed in the drainage tube in five patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecology surgery. Further research is needed to verify whether LMA® Protector™ is suitable for procedures in Trendelenburg position or other situations that a high risk of gastroesophageal reflux exists.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( ChiCTR1800018300 , date of registration: September 2018).

Comparison of the efficacy of supraglottic airway devices in low-risk adult patients: a network meta-analysis and systematic review

Numerous supraglottic airway device (SADs) have been designed for adults; however, their relative efficacy, indicated by parameters such as adequacy of sealing, ease of application, and postinsertion complications, remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of various SADs. We searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials comparing at least two types of SADs published before December 2019. The primary outcomes were oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), risk of first-attempt insertion failure, and postoperative sore throat rate (POST). We included 108 studies (n = 10,645) comparing 17 types of SAD. The Proseal laryngeal mask airway (LMA), the I-gel supraglottic airway, the Supreme LMA, the Streamlined Liner of the Pharynx Airway, the SoftSeal, the Cobra Perilaryngeal Airway, the Air-Q, the Laryngeal Tube, the Laryngeal Tube Suction II, the Laryngeal Tube Suction Disposable, AuraGain, and Protector had significantly higher OLP (mean difference ranging from 3.98 to 9.18 cmH₂O) compared with that of a classic LMA (C-LMA). The Protector exhibited the highest OLP and was ranked first. All SADs had a similar likelihood of first-attempt insertion failure and POST compared with the C-LMA. Our findings indicate that the Protector may be the best SAD because it has the highest OLP.Systematic review registration PROSPERO: CRD42017065273.

A prospective randomized controlled study of combined spinal-general anesthesia vs. general anesthesia for laparoscopic gynecological surgery: Opioid sparing properties

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the magnitude of peri-operative opioid sparing effect when general anesthesia is combined with spinal analgesia for laparoscopic gynecological surgery.

DESIGN

A prospective randomized controlled study; a three-group trial with two comparisons (each intervention group to control).

SETTING

Operating room and postoperative recovery area.

PATIENTS

Patients aged between 18 and 65 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 or 2 who were scheduled for inpatient elective laparoscopic gynecological surgery with expected pneumoperitoneum duration of at least 20 min. Of 102 randomized patients, 99 completed the study.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to general anesthesia alone (control group) or combined with very-low-dose (levobupivacaine 3.75 mg; sufentanil 2.5 μg) or low-dose (levobupivacaine 7.5 mg; sufentanil 2.5 μg) spinal analgesia.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary endpoints were perioperative opioid consumption and pain scores (11-point numeric rating scale) at 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, 4 h and 24 h post-surgery. Secondary endpoints were patient satisfaction with anesthetic care and participation in research, sevoflurane consumption and adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

Intra-operative sufentanil (median [95% CI]) consumption was 16.1 (10.5-22.6) μg/h in the control group versus 4.7 (3.2-9.2) μg/h in the very-low-dose and versus 2.9 (0.0-4.0) μg/h in the low-dose spinal analgesia groups (p < 0.001, for both comparisons). Median (95% CI) piritramide consumption at 24 h post-surgery was 7.5 (3-8) mg in the control group versus 5 (0-7.5) mg in the very-low dose spinal analgesia group (p = 0.182) and versus 2 (0-2.5) mg in the low-dose spinal analgesia group (p = 0.001). Postoperative pain scores were consistently <3 only in the low dose spinal analgesia group. Patient satisfaction with anesthetic care and participation in research was very high in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose spinal analgesia in combination with general anesthesia reduces peri-operative opioid consumption in laparoscopic gynecological surgery in immediate postoperative period.

AuraGain and i-Gel laryngeal masks in general anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Performance characteristics and effects on hemodynamics

Objectives:

To evaluate and compare the performances of new types of supraglottic airway devices (SADs) with endotracheal intubation regarding their ease of insertions, perioperative complications, and effects on hemodynamic parameters and peak airway pressures in laparascopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Methods:

One hundred and fourteen patients with ASA 1-2 physical status scheduled for elective LC were recruited for this prospective randomized controlled trial. The study was completed between January 2016 and January 2017 in Adiyaman University Research and Educational Hospital, Adiyaman, Turkey. The patients were divided into AuraGain^™ (Ambu, Ballerup, Denmark) (n=38), i-Gel® (Intersurgical Ltd, UK) (n=35), and endotracheal tube (ETT) (n=32) groups. Ease of insertion, airway pressures, complications, and hemodynamic variables were compared.

Results:

The trial was completed with 105 patients. Ease of insertion for SADs which was evaluated with insertion procedure duration, attempts, first insertion success rates, and oropharyngeal leak pressures were similar between the groups. Heart rate, systolic and diastolic arterial pressures, and peak airway pressures were significantly lower in the AuraGain and i-Gel® groups, compared with the ETT, p<0.017.

Conclusion:

Both AuraGain and i-Gel® SADs are comparable with ETT used for airway control in general anesthesia for LC, regarding application ease and perioperative complications. Favorable hemodynamic responses to AuraGain and i-Gel® SADs may put them in a better place than ETT.