Comparison of laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal intubation in gynecological cancer operation

Song,Zhenghuan; Tan,Jing; Fang,Jia; Bian,Qingming; Gu,Lianbing

doi:10.3892/ol.2018.9813

Comparison of laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal intubation in gynecological cancer operation

Authors:
- Zhenghuan Song
- Jing Tan
- Jia Fang
- Qingming Bian
- Lianbing Gu
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Anesthesia, Jiangsu Cancer Hospital, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210009, P.R. China, Department of Endocrinology, Nanjing Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210009, P.R. China
Published online on: December 7, 2018 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.9813
Pages: 2344-2350

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Endotracheal intubation (ETI) and laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in terms of hemodynamics and reaction were compared. A total of 54 general anesthesia patients were randomized into two groups with 27 cases in each group. Acceleration index (ACI), cardiac index (CI), cardiac output (CO), left cardiac work (LCW), systemic circulation resistance (SVR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were recorded at 12 time-points: before surgery (T0), start effect (T1), lost consciousness (T2), before ETI or LMA (T3), 1 min (T4), 3 min (T5), 5 min (T6) after ETI or LMA, the beginning of surgery (T7), 30 min (T8), 1 hour (T9) after surgery, the end of surgery (T10) and extubation (T11). In each group these indexes went down and rose up gently during surgery except for T4 (intubation) and T11 (extubation) in ETI. These indexes reached the highest at T11 (extubation). This is due to the stimulus on mucosa and muscle of root of tongue, throat and epiglottis from the windpipe. The stimulus excites sympathetic nerve and increases the release of catecholamine. As a result, the heart beats faster and blood pressure rises. However, the range in the LMA group is smaller especially at T4 and T11. This is most likely due to LMA not stimulating the trachea. SVR, MAP, HR, SBP and DBP were lower in LMA with statistical significance in some time-points. The other indexes such as ACI, CI, CO and LCW were significantly higher in LMA (P<0.05). These results indicated that LMA can be suitable for use in general anesthesia for less stimulation. The airway with LMA in patients undergoing gynecological cancer operation is better than ETI in keeping stable hemodynamics and producing less anesthetic complications with smooth recovery from general anesthesia.

View Figures

View References

1	Badr A, Tobias JD, Rasmussen GE, Stokes DC, Neblett WW III and Campbell P: Bronchoscopic airway evaluation facilitated by the laryngeal mask airway in pediatric patients. Pediatr Pulmonol. 21:57–61. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Khine HH, Corddry DH, Kettrick RG, Martin TM, McCloskey JJ, Rose JB, Theroux MC and Zagnoev M: Comparison of cuffed and uncuffed endotracheal tubes in young children during general anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 86:627–631; discussion 27A. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Junger A, Klasen J, Hartmann B, Benson M, Röhrig R, Kuhn D and Hempelmann G: Shorter discharge time after regional or intravenous anaesthesia in combination with laryngeal mask airway compared with balanced anaesthesia with endotracheal intubation. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 19:119–124. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Kihara S, Brimacombe J, Yaguchi Y, Watanabe S, Taguchi N and Komatsuzaki T: Hemodynamic responses among three tracheal intubation devices in normotensive and hypertensive patients. Anesth Analg. 96:890–895. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Pinosky M: Laryngeal mask airway: Uses in anesthesiology. South Med J. 89:551–555. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Landsman IS: The laryngeal mask airway. Int Anesthesiol Clin. 35:49–65. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Pennant JH and White PF: The laryngeal mask airway. Its uses in anesthesiology. Anesthesiology. 79:144–163. 1993. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Doksrød S, Løfgren B, Nordhammer A, Svendsen MV, Gisselsson L and Raeder J: Reinforced laryngeal mask airway compared with endotracheal tube for adenotonsillectomies. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 27:941–946. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Webster AC, Morley-Forster PK, Janzen V, Watson J, Dain SL, Taves D and Dantzer D: Anesthesia for intranasal surgery: A comparison between tracheal intubation and the flexible reinforced laryngeal mask airway. Anesth Analg. 88:421–425. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	van Zundert TC, Brimacombe JR, Ferson DZ, Bacon DR and Wilkinson DJ: Archie Brain: Celebrating 30 years of development in laryngeal mask airways. Anaesthesia. 67:1375–1385. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Hernandez MR, Klock PA Jr and Ovassapian A: Evolution of the extraglottic airway: A review of its history, applications, and practical tips for success. Anesth Analg. 114:349–368. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Alexander CA: A modified intavent laryngeal mask for ENT and dental anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 45:892–893. 1990. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Jakobsson J: The airway in day surgery. Minerva Anestesiol. 76:38–44. 2010.PubMed/NCBI
14	Shavit I, Aviram E, Hoffmann Y, Biton O and Glassberg E: Laryngeal mask airway as a rescue device for failed endotracheal intubation during scene-to-hospital air transport of combat casualties. Eur J Emerg Med. 25:368–371. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Yang C, Zhu X, Lin W, Zhang Q, Su J, Lin B, Ye H and Yu R: Randomized, controlled trial comparing laryngeal mask versus endotracheal intubation during neonatal resuscitation - a secondary publication. BMC Pediatr. 16:172016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Benger JR, Voss S, Coates D, Greenwood R, Nolan J, Rawstorne S, Rhys M and Thomas M: Randomised comparison of the effectiveness of the laryngeal mask airway supreme, i-gel and current practice in the initial airway management of prehospital cardiac arrest (REVIVE-Airways): a feasibility study research protocol. BMJ Open. 3(pii): e0024672013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Leventis C, Chalkias A, Sampanis MA, Foulidou X and Xanthos T: Emergency airway management by paramedics: Comparison between standard endotracheal intubation, laryngeal mask airway, and I-gel. Eur J Emerg Med. 21:371–373. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Xu R, Lian Y and Li WX: Airway complications during and after general anesthesia: a comparison, systematic review and Meta-Analysis of using flexible laryngeal mask airways and endotracheal tubes. PLoS One. 11:e01581372016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Gasteiger L, Ofner S, Stögermüller B, Ziegler B, Brimacombe J and Keller C: Randomized crossover study assessing oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiber optic positioning: Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme™ versus Laryngeal Tube LTS II™ size 2 in non-paralyzed anesthetized children. Anaesthesist. 65:585–589. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Ozden ES, Meco BC, Alanoglu Z and Alkıs N: Comparison of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) with cuffed and uncuffed endotracheal tubes in infants. Bosn J Basic Med Sci. 16:286–291. 2016.PubMed/NCBI
21	Chun BJ, Bae JS, Lee SH, Joo J, Kim ES and Sun DI: A prospective randomized controlled trial of the laryngeal mask airway versus the endotracheal intubation in the thyroid surgery: evaluation of postoperative voice, and laryngopharyngeal symptom. World J Surg. 39:1713–1720. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Wheeler M: ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in 120 pediatric surgical patients: a prospective evaluation of characteristics and performance. Paediatr Anaesth. 16:297–301. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Sinha A, Sharma B and Sood J: ProSeal as an alternative to endotracheal intubation in pediatric laparoscopy. Paediatr Anaesth. 17:327–332. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Goldmann K, Roettger C and Wulf H: Use of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway for pressure-controlled ventilation with and without positive end-expiratory pressure in paediatric patients: a randomized, controlled study. Br J Anaesth. 95:831–834. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Hanna SF, Mikat-Stevens M, Loo J, Uppal R, Jellish WS and Adams M: Awake tracheal intubation in anticipated difficult airways: LMA Fastrach vs flexible bronchoscope: a pilot study. J Clin Anesth. 37:31–37. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	van Esch BF, Stegeman I and Smit AL: Comparison of laryngeal mask airway vs tracheal intubation: A systematic review on airway complications. J Clin Anesth. 36:142–150. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Al-Mazrou KA, Abdullah KM, ElGammal MS, Ansari RA, Turkistani A and Abdelmeguid ME: Laryngeal mask airway vs. uncuffed endotracheal tube for nasal and paranasal sinus surgery: Paediatric airway protection. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 27:16–19. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Ong M, Chambers NA, Hullet B, Erb TO and von Ungern-Sternberg BS: Laryngeal mask airway and tracheal tube cuff pressures in children: Are clinical endpoints valuable for guiding inflation? Anaesthesia. 63:738–744. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI