Publication:
Blind vs. video-laryngoscope-guided laryngeal mask insertion: A prospective randomized comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic grading

dc.contributor.authorSARAÇOĞLU, AYTEN
dc.contributor.authorsSimsek T., SARAÇOĞLU A., Sezen O., Cakmak G., Saracoglu K. T.
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-11T11:26:15Z
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-11T14:37:56Z
dc.date.available2023-07-11T11:26:15Z
dc.date.issued2022-10-01
dc.description.abstractPurpose Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) insertion may not always be smooth without complications. Controversial results of several studies evaluating ideal insertion conditions have been published. This study compared the oropharyngeal leak pressure values and fiberoptic grading scores between blind and video-laryngoscope-guided LMA insertion. Methods Patients were randomly assigned into blind insertion (n = 50) and video-laryngoscope guided insertion (n = 50) groups. The oropharyngeal leak pressure, peak airway pressure, fiberoptic grading score, first attempt success rate, hemodynamic parameters, and complications were recorded. Results All laryngeal mask airways were successfully inserted in both groups at the first attempt. The fiberoptic staging scores were: grade 1 in 8.2% of patients, grade 2 in 24.4% of patients, grade 3 in 44.8% of patients, grade 4 in 22.4% of patients in the control group. On the other hand, grade 1 in 2.2% of patients, grade 2 in 28.6% of patients, grade 3 in 51% of patients, grade 4 in 8.2% of patients in the VL group (p = 0.260). The peak airway pressure and LMA insertion time were similar between groups. However, the oropharyngeal leak pressure before extubation was significantly higher in the video-laryngoscope-guided insertion than blind insertion (36.29 +/- 7.09 vs. 33.79 +/- 8.84 cmH2O respectively, p = 0.04). Conclusions The findings of our study suggest that the video-laryngoscope-guided LMA-Classic insertion with a standard blade technique may be a helpful alternative to blind insertion.
dc.identifier.citationSimsek T., SARAÇOĞLU A., Sezen O., Cakmak G., Saracoglu K. T., "Blind vs. video-laryngoscope-guided laryngeal mask insertion: A prospective randomized comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic grading", JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MONITORING AND COMPUTING, cilt.36, sa.5, ss.1249-1255, 2022
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10877-022-00841-1
dc.identifier.endpage1255
dc.identifier.issn1387-1307
dc.identifier.issue5
dc.identifier.startpage1249
dc.identifier.urihttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10877-022-00841-1
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11424/291121
dc.identifier.volume36
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofJOURNAL OF CLINICAL MONITORING AND COMPUTING
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectTıp
dc.subjectSağlık Bilimleri
dc.subjectCerrahi Tıp Bilimleri
dc.subjectAnesteziyoloji
dc.subjectMedicine
dc.subjectHealth Sciences
dc.subjectSurgery Medicine Sciences
dc.subjectAnesthesiology
dc.subjectANESTEZİYOLOJİ
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp (MED)
dc.subjectANESTHESIOLOGY
dc.subjectCLINICAL MEDICINE
dc.subjectClinical Medicine (MED)
dc.subjectAnesteziyoloji ve Ağrı Tıbbı
dc.subjectAnesthesiology and Pain Medicine
dc.subjectBlind insertion
dc.subjectLaryngeal mask airway
dc.subjectVideo-laryngoscope
dc.subjectAIRWAY DEVICES
dc.subjectSUPRAGLOTTIC AIRWAY
dc.subjectPLACEMENT
dc.subjectINTUBATION
dc.subjectPOSITION
dc.subjectSUPREME
dc.subjectPROSEAL
dc.titleBlind vs. video-laryngoscope-guided laryngeal mask insertion: A prospective randomized comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic grading
dc.typearticle
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
file.pdf
Size:
1001.31 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format