• J Roger Maltby, Michael T Beriault, Neil C Watson, David Liepert, and Gordon H Fick.
• Department of Anesthesia, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. maltby@ucalgary.ca
• Can J Anaesth. 2002 Oct 1;49(8):857-62.

PurposeTo compare LMA-ProSeal (LMA-PS) with endotracheal tube (ETT) with respect to pulmonary ventilation and gastric distension during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.MethodsWe randomized 109 ASA I-III adults to LMA-PS or ETT after stratifying them as non-obese or obese (body mass index > 30 kg x m-2). After preoxygenation, anesthesia was induced with propofol, fentanyl and rocuronium. An LMA-PS (women #4, men #5) or ETT (women 7 mm, men 8 mm) was inserted and the cuff inflated. A #14 gastric tube was passed into the stomach in every patient and connected to continuous suction. Anesthesia was maintained with nitrous oxide, oxygen and isoflurane. Ventilation was set at 10 mL x kg-1 and 10 breaths x min-1. The surgeon, blinded to the airway device, scored stomach size on an ordinal scale of 0-10 at insertion of the laparoscope and upon decompression of the pneumoperitoneum.ResultsThere were no statistically significant differences in SpO2 or P(ET)CO2 between the two groups before or during peritoneal insufflation in either non-obese or obese patients. Median (range) airway pressure at which oropharyngeal leak occurred during a leak test with LMA-PS was 34 (18-45) cm water. Change in gastric distension during surgery was similar in both groups. Four of 16 obese LMA-PS patients crossed over to ETT because of respiratory obstruction or airway leak.ConclusionsA correctly seated LMA-PS or ETT provided equally effective pulmonary ventilation without clinically significant gastric distension in all non-obese patients. Further studies are required to determine the acceptability of the LMA-PS for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in obese patients.

12 keywords...

hide…