Comparison of Metal Stylet, Small Tracheal Tube and Combined Introducer-Aided Insertions of the Flexible Reinforced Laryngeal Mask Airway with the Conventional Method: a Manikin Study
- *Corresponding Author:
- Dr.Takuro Sanuki
Department of Anesthesiology, Osaka Dental University
1-5-17 Otemae, Chuo-ku, Osaka 540-0008, Japan
E-mail: [email protected] yahoo.co.jp
Received Date: May 16, 2011; Accepted Date: June 20, 2011; Published Date: July 03, 2011
Citation: Sanuki T, Son H, Sugioka S, Komi N, Hirokane M, etal. (2011) Comparison of Metal Stylet, Small Tracheal Tube and Combined Introducer-Aided Insertions of the Flexible Reinforced Laryngeal Mask Airway with the Conventional Method: a Manikin Study. J Anesthe Clinic Res 2:147. doi: 10.4172/2155-6148.1000147
Copyright: © 2011 Sanuki T, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Purpose: The present study compared the conventional method (without any adjunct) and three different adjunct-aided methods (a metal stylet, a small tracheal tube, and a combined introducer) with regard to the time required for insertion of the flexible reinforced laryngeal mask airway (FLMA). We also surveyed participants’ views on the ease of FLMA insertion with each method.
Methods: Thirty dental students inserted the FLMA in a manikin by each method and the times required for insertion were measured. Subjects were asked to rate the ease of insertion with each method using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS; from 0 mm = extremely easy to 100 mm = extremely difficult).
Results: Insertion time was significantly shorter with the small tracheal tube compared with the conventional method. However, insertion times with the metal stylet-aided insertion and the combined introducer-aided insertion were not significantly different as compared to the conventional method. With regard to the ease of insertion as rated using the 100-mm VAS, the dental students rated tracheal tube-aided insertion and combined introducer-aided insertion as being significantly easier, and the metal stylet-aided insertion as significantly more difficult than the conventional method.
Conclusions: The small tracheal tube-aided insertion and the combined introducer-aided insertion each appear to possess advantages over the conventional method. The small tracheal tube-aided insertion seems overall more favorable in terms of ease and time to insertion.