2013PubMedRequires access

[Comparison of efficacy for laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) versus common laryngeal mask airway in children].

Shangguan Wn, Shan You, Wei He, Di Mq, Jin Xu, Jiehui Li, Lian Qq

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) versus common laryngeal mask airway in children with general anesthesia. METHODS: With local research ethics committee's approval and written informed parental consent, 100 children were randomly divided into groups L (size 2.0 common laryngeal mask airway) and S (size 2.0 laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM)) according to random number (n = 50 each). After anesthesia induction, a common laryngeal mask airway or laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) was inserted and mechanically ventilated. Time and ease for insertion, insertion success rate, airway leak pressure, success rate and ease of disposal sputum collecting tube insertion in group S, quality of airway during anesthetic maintenance, abdominal circumference changes and complications within 24 h post-operation were measured. RESULTS: Compared with group L, abdominal circumference increased less in group S (0.90 ± 0.35 vs 0.43 ± 0.18 cm, n = 46, P < 0.01). No significant inter-group differences existed for other measurements. Disposal sputum collecting tube was successfully placed in group S(100%). CONCLUSION: In children with mechanical ventilation, laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) can be effectively applied to maintain a good airway. And the incidence of gastric insufflation is lower. It is particularly useful for those requiring evacuation of gastric contents during general anesthesia.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) versus common laryngeal mask airway in children with general anesthesia. METHODS: With local research ethics committee's approval and written informed parental consent, 100 children were randomly divided into groups L (size 2.0 common laryngeal mask airway) and S (size 2.0 laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM)) according to random number (n = 50 each). After anesthesia induction, a common laryngeal mask airway or laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) was inserted and mechanically ventilated. Time and ease for insertion, insertion success rate, airway leak pressure, success rate and ease of disposal sputum collecting tube insertion in group S, quality of airway during anesthetic maintenance, abdominal circumference changes and complications within 24 h post-operation were measured. RESULTS: Compared with group L, abdominal circumference increased less in group S (0.90 ± 0.35 vs 0.43 ± 0.18 cm, n = 46, P < 0.01). No significant inter-group differences existed for other measurements. Disposal sputum collecting tube was successfully placed in group S(100%). CONCLUSION: In children with mechanical ventilation, laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) can be effectively applied to maintain a good airway. And the incidence of gastric insufflation is lower. It is particularly useful for those requiring evacuation of gastric contents during general anesthesia.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) versus common laryngeal mask airway in children with general anesthesia. METHODS: With local research ethics committee's approval and written informed parental consent, 100 children were randomly divided into groups L (size 2.0 common laryngeal mask airway) and S (size 2.0 laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM)) according to random number (n = 50 each). After anesthesia induction, a common laryngeal mask airway or laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) was inserted and mechanically ventilated. Time and ease for insertion, insertion success rate, airway leak pressure, success rate and ease of disposal sputum collecting tube insertion in group S, quality of airway during anesthetic maintenance, abdominal circumference changes and complications within 24 h post-operation were measured. RESULTS: Compared with group L, abdominal circumference increased less in group S (0.90 ± 0.35 vs 0.43 ± 0.18 cm, n = 46, P < 0.01). No significant inter-group differences existed for other measurements. Disposal sputum collecting tube was successfully placed in group S(100%). CONCLUSION: In children with mechanical ventilation, laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) can be effectively applied to maintain a good airway. And the incidence of gastric insufflation is lower. It is particularly useful for those requiring evacuation of gastric contents during general anesthesia.

Key concepts: Laryngeal mask airway, Medicine, Airway, Anesthesia, Larynx, Insufflation, Laryngeal Masks, Sputum

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
[Comparison of efficacy for laryngeal mask airway-Supreme(TM) versus common laryngeal mask airway in children]. — Research Paper | ScholarLens