Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Assessing a novel second generation laryngeal mask airway using the 'ADEPT' approach: results from the LMA® Protector™ observational study.
Ní Eochagáin, A; Athanassoglou, V; Cumberworth, A; Morris, O; Corbett, S; Jefferson, H; O'Sullivan, E P; Pandit, J J.
Afiliação
  • Ní Eochagáin A; Consultant Anaesthetist St. James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
  • Athanassoglou V; Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
  • Cumberworth A; Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
  • Morris O; Consultant Anaesthetist St. James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
  • Corbett S; Consultant Anaesthetist St. James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
  • Jefferson H; Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
  • O'Sullivan EP; Consultant Anaesthetist St. James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
  • Pandit JJ; Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK. jaideep.pandit@sjc.ox.ac.uk.
J Clin Monit Comput ; 37(2): 517-524, 2023 04.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36063277
To address the problem of lack of clinical evidence for airway devices introduced to the market, the Difficult Airway Society (UK) developed an approach (termed ADEPT; Airway Device Evaluation Project Team) to standardise the model for device evaluation. Under this framework we assessed the LMA Protector, a second generation laryngeal mask airway. A total of 111 sequential adult patients were recruited and the LMA Protector inserted after induction of general anaesthesia. Effective insertion was confirmed by resistance to further distal movement, manual ventilation, and listening for gas leakage at the mouth. The breathing circuit was connected to the airway channel and airway patency confirmed with manual test ventilation at 20 cm H20 (water) pressure for 3 s. Data was collected in relation to the time for placement, intraoperative performance and postoperative performance of the airway device. Additionally, investigators rated the ease of insertion and adequacy of lung ventilation on a 5-point scale. The median (interquartile range [range]) time taken to insertion of the device was 31 (26-40[14-780]) s with the ability to ventilate after device insertion 100 (95% CI 96.7- 100)%. Secondary endpoints included one or more manoeuvres 60.3 (95% CI 50.6-69.5)% cases requiring to assist insertion; a median ease of insertion score of 4 (2-5[3-5]), and a median adequacy of ventilation score of 5 (5-5[4-5]). However, the first time insertion rate failure was 9.9% (95% CI 5.1-17.0%). There were no episodes of patient harm recorded, particularly desaturation. The LMA Protector appears suitable for clinical use, but an accompanying article discusses our reflections on the ADEPT approach to studying airway devices from a strategic perspective.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Máscaras Laríngeas Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Máscaras Laríngeas Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article