02354nas a2200241 4500008004100000245014200041210006900183260001500252300000800267490000600275520159500281653003401876653002601910653003201936653001201968653002501980100001302005700001202018700001502030700001302045700001502058856003902073 2015 eng d00aA Study to Compare the Stability of Proseal Laryngeal Mask Airway and Standard Laryngeal Mask Airway in Different Head and Neck Positions0 aStudy to Compare the Stability of Proseal Laryngeal Mask Airway  cMarch 2015 a1-60 v43 a

Background: Laryngeal mask airway (LMA)-Classic (CLMA) and Laryngeal mask airway (LMA)-Proseal (PLMA) are commonly used supraglottic devices for different kind of surgeries. We compared oropharyngeal leak pressure, intracuff pressure and anatomical position for LMA-Proseal and LMA-classic in four different head and neck positions: neutral, flexion, extension and left lateral rotation. Materials and Methods: LMA-Proseal and LMA-Classic were inserted randomly in 100 adult patients. Oropharyngeal leak pressure, intracuff pressure and anatomical position of the airway were recorded in four head and neck positions (neutral first, then flexion, extension and left lateral rotation). Results: Compared with neutral position, oropharyngeal leak pressure for both LMA-Proseal and LMA-Classic was higher in flexion and left lateral rotation but lower in extension (all p values <0.005). Changes in head-neck position did not alter the anatomical position of the airway. Oropharyngeal leak pressure was always higher for LMA-Proseal than for LMA-Classic (p value < 0.001). Conclusion: The anatomical position of LMA-Proseal and LMA-Classic is stable in different head-neck positions, but head-neck flexion and left rotation are associated with an increase and head-neck extension is associated with a decrease in oropharyngeal leak pressure and intracuff pressure as compared to neutral position. LMA-Proseal forms a better seal than LMA-Classic in all the different head and neck positions.

10aClassic Laryngeal Mask Airway10aLaryngeal Mask Airway10aOropharyngeal Leak Pressure10aProseal10aSupraglottic Devices1 aS, Taxak1 aS, Rani1 aG, Ahlawat1 aK, Singh1 aP, Raghove uhttps://ijphs.org/article/2015/4/1