Endotracheal tube cuff pressure in three hospitals, and the volume required to produce an appropriate cuff pressure.

BACKGROUND: Cuff pressure in endotracheal (ET) tubes should be in the range of 20-30 cm H2O. We tested the hypothesis that the tube cuff is inadequately inflated when manometers are not used. METHODS: With IRB approval, we studied 93 patients under general anesthesia with an ET tube in place in one teaching and two private hospitals. Anesthetists were blinded to study purpose. Cuff pressure in tube sizes 7.0 to 8.5 mm was evaluated 60 min after induction of general anesthesia using a manometer connected to the cuff pilot balloon. Nitrous oxide was disallowed. After deflating the cuff, we reinflated it in 0.5-ml increments until pressure was 20 cmH2O. RESULTS: Neither patient morphometrics, institution, experience of anesthesia provider, nor tube size influenced measured cuff pressure (35.3 +/- 21.6 cmH2O). Only 27% of pressures were within 20-30 cmH2O; 27% exceeded 40 cmH2O. Although it varied considerably, the amount of air required to achieve a cuff pressure of 20 cmH2O was similar with each tube size. CONCLUSION: We recommend that ET cuff pressure be set and monitored with a manometer.

Women have the same desflurane minimum alveolar concentration as men: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Women generally report greater sensitivity to pain than do men, and healthy young women require 20% more anesthetic than healthy age-matched men to prevent movement in response to noxious electrical stimulation. In contrast, minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) for xenon is 26% less in elderly Japanese women than in elderly Japanese men. Whether anesthetic requirement is similar in men and women thus remains in dispute. The authors therefore tested the hypothesis that the desflurane concentration required to prevent movement in response to skin incision (MAC) differs between men and women. METHODS: Using the Dixon "up and down" method, the authors determined MAC for desflurane in 15 female and 15 male patients (18-40 yr old) undergoing surgery. RESULTS: MAC was 6.2 +/- 0.4% desflurane for women versus 6.0 +/- 0.3% for men (P = 0.31), a difference of only 3%. These data provide 90% power to detect a 9% difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The MAC of desflurane did not differ between young men and women undergoing surgery with a true surgical incision. Although pain sensitivity may differ in women versus men, MAC of desflurane does not.

The new perilaryngeal airway (CobraPLA) is as efficient as the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) but provides better airway sealing pressures.

The Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) is a frequently used efficient airway device, yet it sometimes seals poorly, thus reducing the efficacy of positive-pressure ventilation. The Perilaryngeal Airway (CobraPLA) is a novel airway device with a larger pharyngeal cuff (when inflated). We tested the hypothesis that the CobraPLA was superior to the LMA with regard to insertion time and airway sealing pressure and comparable to the LMA in airway adequacy and recovery characteristics. After midazolam and fentanyl administration, 81 ASA physical status I-II outpatients having elective surgery were randomized to receive an LMA or CobraPLA. Anesthesia was induced with propofol (2.5 mg/kg IV), and the airway was inserted. We measured 1) insertion time; 2) adequacy of the airway (no leak at 15-cm-H2O peak pressure or tidal volume of 5 mL/kg); 3) airway sealing pressure; 4) number of repositioning attempts; and 5) sealing quality (no leak at tidal volume of 8 mL/kg). At the end of surgery, gastric insufflation, postoperative sore throat, dysphonia, and dysphagia were evaluated. Data were compared with unpaired Student's t-tests, chi2 tests, or Fisher's exact tests; P < 0.05 was significant. Patient characteristics, insertion times, airway adequacy, number of repositioning attempts, and recovery were similar in each group. Airway sealing pressure was significantly greater with CobraPLA (23 +/- 6 cm H2O) than LMA (18 +/- 5 cm H2O, P < 0.001). The CobraPLA has insertion characteristics similar to the LMA but better airway sealing capabilities.