RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the possible noninferiority of surfactant administration via laryngeal mask airway (LMA) vs endotracheal tube (ETT) in avoiding the requirement for mechanical ventilation in preterm neonates with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). STUDY DESIGN: This was a randomized controlled trial including infants born at 27 to 36 weeks of gestation, >800 g, diagnosed with RDS and receiving fraction of inspired oxygen 0.30-0.60 via noninvasive respiratory support. Infants were randomized to surfactant via LMA (with atropine premedication) or ETT (InSuRE approach with atropine and remifentanil premedication). Primary outcome was failure of surfactant treatment to prevent the need for mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Patients were randomized, 51 to LMA and 42 to the ETT group. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics, with birth weights ranging from 810 to 3560 g. Failure rate was 29% in the ETT group and 20% in the LMA group (P = .311). This difference was due to early failures (within 1 hour), with 12.5% in the ETT group and 2% in the LMA group (P = .044). Surfactant therapy via LMA was non-inferior to administration via ETT; failure risk difference -9.0% (CI -∞ to 5.7%). Efficacy in decreasing fraction of inspired oxygen, number of surfactant doses administered, time to wean off all respiratory support, rates of adverse events, and outcomes including pneumothorax and BPD diagnosis did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Surfactant therapy via LMA was noninferior to administration via ETT and it decreased early failures, possibly by avoiding adverse effects of premedication, laryngoscopy, and intubation. These characteristics make LMA a desirable conduit for surfactant administration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02164734.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The role of supraglottic airway devices in emergency airway management is highlighted in international airway management guidelines. We evaluated the application of the new generation laryngeal tube suction (LTS-II/LTS-D) in the management of in-hospital unexpected difficult airway and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. METHODS: During a seven-year period, patients treated with a laryngeal tube who received routine anesthesia and had an unexpected difficult airway (Cormack Lehane Grade 3-4), who underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation, or who underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation outside the operating room and had a difficult airway were evaluated. Successful placement of the LTS II/LTS-D, sufficient ventilation, time to placement, number of placement attempts, stomach content, peripheral oxygen saturation/end-tidal carbon dioxide development (SpO2/etCO2) over 5 minutes, subjective overall assessment and complications were recorded. RESULTS: In total, 106 adult patients were treated using an LTS-II/LTS-D. The main indication for placement was a difficult airway (75%, n=80), followed by cardiopulmonary resuscitation (25%, n=26) or an overlap between both (18%, n=19). In 94% of patients (n=100), users placed the laryngeal tube during the first attempt. In 93% of patients (n=98), the tube was placed within 30 seconds. A significant increase in SpO2 from 97% (0-100) to 99% (5-100) was observed in the whole population and in cardiopulmonary resuscitation patients. The average initial etCO2 of 39.5 mmHg (0-100 mmHg) decreased significantly to an average of 38.4 mmHg (10-62 mmHg) after 5 minutes. A comparison of cardiopulmonary resuscitation patients with non-cardiopulmonary resuscitation patients regarding gastric contents showed no significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: LTS-D/LTS-II use for in-hospital unexpected difficult airway management provides a secure method for primary airway management until other options such as video laryngoscopy or fiber optic intubation become available.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

ABSTRACTPURPOSE: The i-gelTM is one of the second generation supraglottic airway devices. Our study was designed to compare the i-gel and the Laryngeal Mask Airway ClassicTM with respect to the clinical performance.METHODS: We compared the performance of the i-gel with that of the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic in 120 patients undergoing urologic surgery during general anesthesia without muscle relaxant with respect to the number of attempts for successful insertion, insertion time, peak airway pressure, incidence of regurgitation, fiberoptic glottic view and postoperative complications. Second generation supraglottic airway devices were inserted by the same anesthesiologist, experienced in use of both devices (>200 uses and first time failure rate <5%). Methylene blue method was used to detect gastric regurgitation.RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the two groups regarding the success of insertion of second generation supraglottic airway device (p = 0.951). The laryngeal mask insertion time for the i-gel group was significantly shorter than that for the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic group (11.6 ± 2.4 s versus 13.1 ± 1.8 s [p = 0.001]). The fiberoptic glottic view scores for the i-gel group was significantly better than that for the ones for the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic group (p = 0.001). On fiberoptic view, there was no sign of methylene blue dye at any time point in either group. In addition, there was no difference between the groups in patient response regarding the presence of a sore throat when questioned 24 h after the procedure (p = 0.752).CONCLUSION: Both devices had good performance with low postoperative complications and without occurrence of regurgitation. The i-gel provided a shorter insertion time and a better fiberoptic view than the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic.

RESUMOJUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVO: A i-gel é um dos dispositivos supraglóticos de segunda geração para o manejo das vias aéreas. Nosso estudo foi projetado para comparar a i-gelTM e a máscara laríngea clássica (Laryngeal Mask Airway ClassicTM, LMA-C) em relação ao desempenho clínico.MÉTODOS: Avaliamos os desempenhos de i-gel e LMA-C em 120 pacientes submetidos à cirurgia urológica sob anestesia geral sem relaxante muscular. Comparamos o número de tentativas de inserção bem-sucedidas, o tempo de inserção, a pressão de pico das vias aéreas, a incidência de regurgitação, a visibilidade da glote com o uso de fibra óptica e as complicações no pós-operatório. Os dispositivos supraglóticos de segunda geração foram inseridos pelo mesmo anestesiologista com experiência na aplicação de ambos os dispositivos (> 200 aplicações e taxa de falha na primeira tentativa < 5%). O corante azul de metileno foi usado para detectar regurgitação gástrica.RESULTADOS: Não houve diferença estatística entre os dois grupos em relação ao sucesso da inserção do dispositivo supraglótico de segunda geração (p = 0,951). O tempo de inserção da máscara laríngea no grupo i-gel foi significativamente menor do que no grupo LMA-C (11,6 ± 2,4 segundos vs. 13,1 ± 1,8 segundos, p = 0,001). O escore de visibilidade da glote via fibra óptica do grupo i-gel foi significativamente melhor do que o do grupo LMA-C (p = 0,001). Na visão via fibra ótica, sinais do corante azul de metileno não foram observados em qualquer momento em ambos os grupos. Além disso, não houve diferença entre as respostas dos grupos quando perguntados sobre a presença de dor de garganta 24 horas após o procedimento (p = 0,752).CONCLUSÃO: Ambos os dispositivos apresentaram bom desempenho, com poucas complicações no pós-operatório e sem ocorrência de regurgitação. A máscara laríngea i-gel proporcionou um tempo de inserção mais curto e uma visão via fibra óptica melhor do que a LMA-C.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The i-gel™ is one of the second generation supraglottic airway devices. Our study was designed to compare the i-gel and the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic™ with respect to the clinical performance. METHODS: We compared the performance of the i-gel with that of the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic in 120 patients undergoing urologic surgery during general anesthesia without muscle relaxant with respect to the number of attempts for successful insertion, insertion time, peak airway pressure, incidence of regurgitation, fiberoptic glottic view and postoperative complications. Second generation supraglottic airway devices were inserted by the same anesthesiologist, experienced in use of both devices (>200 uses and first time failure rate <5%). Methylene blue method was used to detect gastric regurgitation. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the two groups regarding the success of insertion of second generation supraglottic airway device (p=0.951). The laryngeal mask insertion time for the i-gel group was significantly shorter than that for the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic group (11.6±2.4s versus 13.1±1.8s [p=0.001]). The fiberoptic glottic view scores for the i-gel group was significantly better than that for the ones for the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic group (p=0.001). On fiberoptic view, there was no sign of methylene blue dye at any time point in either group. In addition, there was no difference between the groups in patient response regarding the presence of a sore throat when questioned 24h after the procedure (p=0.752). CONCLUSION: Both devices had good performance with low postoperative complications and without occurrence of regurgitation. The i-gel provided a shorter insertion time and a better fiberoptic view than the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The i-gel™ is one of the second generation supraglottic airway devices. Our study was designed to compare the i-gel and the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic™ with respect to the clinical performance. METHODS: We compared the performance of the i-gel with that of the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic in 120 patients undergoing urologic surgery during general anesthesia without muscle relaxant with respect to the number of attempts for successful insertion, insertion time, peak airway pressure, incidence of regurgitation, fiberoptic glottic view and postoperative complications. Second generation supraglottic airway devices were inserted by the same anesthesiologist, experienced in use of both devices (>200 uses and first time failure rate <5%). Methylene blue method was used to detect gastric regurgitation. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the two groups regarding the success of insertion of second generation supraglottic airway device (p=0.951). The laryngeal mask insertion time for the i-gel group was significantly shorter than that for the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic group (11.6±2.4s versus 13.1±1.8s [p=0.001]). The fiberoptic glottic view scores for the i-gel group was significantly better than that for the ones for the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic group (p=0.001). On fiberoptic view, there was no sign of methylene blue dye at any time point in either group. In addition, there was no difference between the groups in patient response regarding the presence of a sore throat when questioned 24h after the procedure (p=0.752). CONCLUSION: Both devices had good performance with low postoperative complications and without occurrence of regurgitation. The i-gel provided a shorter insertion time and a better fiberoptic view than the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic.

Asunto(s)