Volume 14, Issue 1 (2022)
Iran J War Public Health 2022, 14(1): 51-57 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2022/01/1 | Accepted: 2022/02/23 | Published: 2022/03/5
Received: 2022/01/1 | Accepted: 2022/02/23 | Published: 2022/03/5
Rights and permissions
1- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care No. 1, City Clinical Hospital No. 23, Yekaterinburg, Russian Federation
2- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care No. 5, City Clinical Hospital No. 40, Yekaterinburg, Russian Federation
3- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Ural State Medical University, Yekaterinburg, Russian Federation
2- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care No. 5, City Clinical Hospital No. 40, Yekaterinburg, Russian Federation
3- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Ural State Medical University, Yekaterinburg, Russian Federation
Abstract (1076 Views)
Aims: The study aimed to compare endotracheal intubation with i-gel and LMA (laryngeal mask airway) supreme supraglottic airway devices in orbital osteosynthesis surgery.
Materials & Methods: This comparative perspective single-center randomized study was conducted in Yekaterinburg Clinical Hospitals, Russia, in 2021. The number of 134 patients undergoing orbital plasty after fracture were enrolled in the study and were randomized into three groups: 43 in the endotracheal intubation group, 42 in the LMA-Supreme group, and 49 patients were included in the i-gel group. Hemodynamic parameters, respiratory mechanics, respiration, oropharyngeal leak pressure at different stages of surgical intervention, as well as the time of airway device insertion, the number of attempts, and the need for additional maneuvers to insert the airway device were assessed. For statistical processing, the EZR 1.37 on R commander 3.4.1 was used with the Kruskal-Wallis h-criterion and Pearson’s χ²-test.
Findings: In the postoperative period, the assessment of complications associated with the insertion of airway devices was implemented. We did not receive clinically significant differences in mechanical ventilation parameters between groups at the study stages (p>0.05). A reliable difference in oropharyngeal leak pressure at the beginning and the end of the surgical intervention was obtained (p<0.05). The number of complications was minimal and did not differ between the groups (p>0.05).
Conclusion: LMA-S and i-gel supraglottic airway devices allow to provide normal lung ventilation and gas exchange and can be an alternative to endotracheal intubation during orbital osteosynthesis surgery.
Materials & Methods: This comparative perspective single-center randomized study was conducted in Yekaterinburg Clinical Hospitals, Russia, in 2021. The number of 134 patients undergoing orbital plasty after fracture were enrolled in the study and were randomized into three groups: 43 in the endotracheal intubation group, 42 in the LMA-Supreme group, and 49 patients were included in the i-gel group. Hemodynamic parameters, respiratory mechanics, respiration, oropharyngeal leak pressure at different stages of surgical intervention, as well as the time of airway device insertion, the number of attempts, and the need for additional maneuvers to insert the airway device were assessed. For statistical processing, the EZR 1.37 on R commander 3.4.1 was used with the Kruskal-Wallis h-criterion and Pearson’s χ²-test.
Findings: In the postoperative period, the assessment of complications associated with the insertion of airway devices was implemented. We did not receive clinically significant differences in mechanical ventilation parameters between groups at the study stages (p>0.05). A reliable difference in oropharyngeal leak pressure at the beginning and the end of the surgical intervention was obtained (p<0.05). The number of complications was minimal and did not differ between the groups (p>0.05).
Conclusion: LMA-S and i-gel supraglottic airway devices allow to provide normal lung ventilation and gas exchange and can be an alternative to endotracheal intubation during orbital osteosynthesis surgery.
Keywords:
References
1. Frerk C, Mitchell VS, McNarry AF, Mendonca C, Bhagrath R, Patel A. Difficult Airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults. Br J Anaesth. 2015;115(6):827-48. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/bja/aev371]
2. Apfelbaum JL, Hagberg CA, Caplan RA, Blitt CD, Connis RT, Nickinovich DG, et al. Practice guidelines for the management of the difficult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Anesth. 2013;118(2):251-70. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/ALN.0b013e31827773b2]
3. Gahan K, Studnek JR, Vandeventer S. King LT-D use by urban basic life support first responders as the primary airway device for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2011;82(12):1525-8. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.06.036]
4. Hubble MW, Wilfong DA, Brown LH, Hertelendy A, Benner RW. A meta-analysis of prehospital airway control techniques, part II: Alternative airway devices and cricothyrotomy success rates. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2010;14(4):515-30. [Link] [DOI:10.3109/10903127.2010.497903]
5. Andreenko AA, Grachev IN, Faizov II. Comparison of intubating supraglottic airways lma fastrach™ and ilts-d® under normal and simulated difficult airways - Study on the mannequin. Ann Crit Care. 2017;1:12-18. [Russian] [Link] [DOI:10.21320/1818-474X-2017-1-12-19]
6. Schalk R, Byhahn C, Fausel F, Egner A, Oberndörfer D, Walcher F, et al. Out-of-hospital airway management by paramedics and emergency physicians using laryngeal tubes. Resuscitation. 2010;81(3):323-6. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.11.007]
7. Lim Y, Goel S, Brimacombe JR. The ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway is an effective alternative to laryngoscope-guided tracheal intubation for gynaecological laparoscopy. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2007;35(1):52-6. [Link] [DOI:10.1177/0310057X0703500106]
8. Van Zundert TC, Brimacombe JR. Similar oropharyngeal leak pressures during anaesthesia with i-gel, LMA-ProSeal and LMA-Supreme Laryngeal Masks. Acta Anaesth Belg. 2012;63(1):35-41. [Link]
9. Das B, Varshney R, Mitra S. A randomised controlled trial comparing ProSeal laryngeal mask airway, i gel and Laryngeal Tube Suction D under general anaesthesia for elective surgical patients requiring controlled ventilation. Indian J Anaesth. 2017;61(12):32-7. [Link] [DOI:10.4103/ija.IJA_339_17]
10. Somri M, Vaida S, Fornari GG, Mendoza GR, Charco-Mora P, Hawash N, et al. A randomized prospective controlled trial comparing the laryngeal tube suction disposable and the supreme laryngeal mask airway: the influence of head and neck position on oropharyngeal seal pressure. BMC Anesth. 2016;6:87. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s12871-016-0290-2]
11. Chen X, Jiao J, Cong X, Liu L, Wu X. A comparison of the performance of the I-gelTM vs. the LMA-STM during Anesthesia: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e71910. [Link] [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0071910]
12. Liew GHC, Yu ED, Shah SS, Kothandan H. Comparison of the clinical performance of i-gel, LMA Supreme and LMA ProSeal in elective surgery. Singapore Med J. 2016;57(8):432-7. [Link] [DOI:10.11622/smedj.2016133]
13. Maitra S, Khanna P, Baidya DK. Comparison of laryngeal mask airway Supreme and laryngeal mask airway Pro-Seal for controlled ventilation during general anaesthesia in adult patients: systematic review with meta-analysis. Eur J Anaesth. 2014;31(5):266-73. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/01.EJA.0000435015.89651.3d]
14. Arı DE, Ar AY, Karip CŞ, Siyahkoç İ, Arslan AH, Akgün FN. Comparison of I-gel with classic laryngeal mask airway regarding the ease of use and clinical performance. Turk J Anaesth Reanim. 2015;43:299-303. [Link] [DOI:10.5152/TJAR.2015.71542]
15. Kömür E, Bakan N, Tomruk ŞG, Karaören G, Doğan ZT. Comparison of the supraglottic airway devices classic, fastrach and supreme laryngeal mask airway: A prospective randomised clinical trial of efficacy, safety and complications. Turk J Anaesth Reanim. 2015;43(6):406-11. [Link] [DOI:10.5152/TJAR.2015.97830]
16. Mukadder S, Zekine B, Erdogan KG, Ulku O, Muharrem U, Saim Y, et al. Comparison of the Proseal, Supreme, and I-Gel SAD in gynecological laparoscopic surgeries. Sci World J. 2015:634320. [Link] [DOI:10.1155/2015/634320]
17. Park SY, Rim JC, Kim H, Lee JH, Chung CJ. Comparison of i-gel® and LMA Supreme® during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Korean J Anesth. 2015;68(5):455-61. [Link] [DOI:10.4097/kjae.2015.68.5.455]
18. Russo SG, Cremer S, Galli T, Eich C, Bräuer A, Crozier TA, et al. Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients. BMC Anesthesiol. 2012;12:18. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/1471-2253-12-18]
19. Likhvantsev VV, Bolshedvorov RV. Optimization of initial anesthesia in a one-day surgical hospital. Gen Reanimatol. 2010;6(1):44-8. [Link] [DOI:10.15360/1813-9779-2010-1-44]
20. Mironov PI, Estekhin AM, Mirasov AA. Anaesthetic maintenance with laryngeal mask for a laparoscopic surgery in pediatric patients. Russ J Anaesth Reanimatol. 2013;(1):10-4. [Russian] [Link]
21. Dolbneva EL, Stamov VI, Gavrilov SV, Mizikov VM. Intubating laryngeal mask efficacy in obese and overweight patients. Russ J Anaesth Reanimatol. 2013;2:58-62. [Russian] [Link]
22. Saraswat N, Kumar A, Mishra A, Gupta A, Saurabh G, Srivastava U. The comparison of Proseal laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal tube in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries under general anesthesia. Indian J Anaesth. 2011;55(2):129-34. [Link] [DOI:10.4103/0019-5049.79891]
23. Güleç H, Cakan T, Yaman H, Kilinç AŞ, Başar H. Comparison of hemodynamic and metabolic stress responses caused by endotracheal tube and Proseal laryngeal mask airway in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Res Med Sci. 2012;17(2):148-53. [Link]
24. Kostetskiy IV, Shamrikov AA, Bagin VA, Kaliskin AA. Comparison of LMA-SUPREME, i-gel and LTS-D during orbital fractures reconstruction. Russ J Anaesth Reanimatol. 2018;4:57-63. [Russian] [Link] [DOI:10.17116/anaesthesiology201804157]
25. Gel'fand BR, Kirienko PA, Grinenko TF, Gur'yanov VA. Anesthesiology and Reanimatology. Moscow: Literra; 2006. [Russian] [Link]
26. Kostetskiy IV, Shamrikov АА, Bagin VА, Kaliskin АА. Results of the randomized comparative study of second-generation supraglottic airways in orbital osteosynthesis. Messenger Anesth Resusc. 2019;16(6):46-53. [Russian] [Link] [DOI:10.21292/2078-5658-2019-16-6-46-53]