JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1) Google Scholar Articles by Bercker, S. Articles by Kerner, T. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bercker, S. Articles by Kerner, T. Related Collections Ambulatory Airway

---

AMBULATORY ANESTHESIOLOGY

A Comparison of Seal in Seven Supraglottic Airway Devices Using a Cadaver Model of Elevated Esophageal Pressure

Sven Bercker, MD^*, Willi Schmidbauer, MD, Thomas Volk, MD, Gottfried Bogusch, PhD, Hans Peter Bubser, MD, Mario Hensel, MD, and Thoralf Kerner, MD

From the *Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Leipzig University Hospital, Germany; Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Bundeswehrkrankenhaus, Berlin, Germany; Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Campus Virchow-Klinikum and Campus Charité Mitte, and Center for Anatomy, Charité-Universitaetsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Sven Bercker, Klinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivtherapie Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstr.20, 04103 Leipzig Germany. Address e-mail to sven.bercker{at}medizin.uni-leipzig.de.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Supraglottic airway devices are increasingly important in clinical anesthesia and prehospital emergency medicine, but there are only few data to assess the risk for aspiration. We designed this study to compare the seal of seven supraglottic airway devices in a cadaver model of elevated esophageal pressure.

METHODS: The classic laryngeal mask airway, laryngeal mask airway ProSeal^TM, intubating laryngeal mask airway Fastrach^TM, laryngeal tube^TM, laryngeal tube LTS II^TM, Combitube^TM, and Easytube^TM were inserted into unfixed human cadavers with an exposed esophagus that had been connected to a water column of 130 cm height. Slow and fast increases of esophageal pressure were performed and the water pressure at which leakage appeared was registered.

RESULTS: The Combitube, Easytube, and intubating laryngeal mask Fastrach withstood the water pressure up to more than 120 cm H₂O. The laryngeal mask airway ProSeal, laryngeal tube, and laryngeal tube LTS II were able to block the esophagus until 72–82 cm H₂O. The classic laryngeal mask airway showed leakage at 48 cm H₂O, but only minor leakage was found in the trachea. Devices with an additional esophageal drain tube drained fluid sufficiently without pulmonary aspiration.

CONCLUSIONS: Concerning the risk of aspiration, the use of devices with an additional esophageal drainage lumen might be superior for use in patients with an increased risk of aspiration. The Combitube, Easytube, and intubating laryngeal mask Fastrach showed the best capacity to withstand an increase of esophageal pressure.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Bercker, W. Schmidbauer, and T. Kerner Esophageal Seal Is Not the Only Consideration in Supraglottic Airway Devices Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2008; 107(1): 345 - 345. [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. V. Genzwuerker and J. Hinkelbein Esophageal Seal Is Not the Only Consideration in Supraglottic Airway Devices Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2008; 107(1): 344 - 345. [Full Text] [PDF]

Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999