Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
https://bjan-sba.org/article/doi/10.1016/j.bjan.2012.08.001
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
Scientific Article

Estudo clínico prospectivo aleatório sobre o uso da máscara laríngea Supreme® em pacientes submetidos a anestesia geral

Prospective, randomized clinical trial of laryngeal mask airway Supreme® used in patients undergoing general anesthesia

Sara R. Barreira; Camila Machado Souza; Fernanda Fabrizia; Ana Bárbara G. Azevedo; Talitha G. Lelis; Claudia Lutke

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjan.2012.08.001 Braz J Anesthesiol, vol.63, n6, p.456-460, 2013
PDF Português
PDF English
Downloads: 0
Views: 616

Resumo

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Dispositivos supraglóticos são cada vez mais usados como opção à intubação traqueal durante procedimentos eletivos de complexidade variável. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar prospectivamente o uso clínico da máscara laríngea Supreme® (MLS) em pacientes submetidas a procedimentos cirúrgicos eletivos na mama e compará-la ao tubo endotraqueal (TE). MÉTODO: 60 pacientes submetidas a procedimentos cirúrgicos da mama sob anestesia geral foram distribuídas aleatoriamente em dois grupos de acordo com o dispositivo usado (MLS ou TE). Foram avaliados: tempo de inserção, número de tentativas para inserção, resposta hemodinâmica à inserção, presença de sangue no dispositivo usado e incidência de dor de garganta, disfagia, náuseas e vômitos no pós-operatório. RESULTADOS: Não houve diferença entre os grupos com relação ao tempo de inserção, ao número de tentativas para inserção bem-sucedida e à presença de sangue no dispositivo. A frequência cardíaca e a pressão arterial após a inserção foram maiores no grupo TE. A incidência de dor de garganta e disfagia após duas horas de pós-operatório também foi maior no grupo TE. Não houve diferença na incidência e na intensidade das complicações avaliadas após seis horas de pós-operatório. CONCLUSÕES: O uso da MLS como técnica de acesso à via aérea durante a anestesia geral em procedimentos cirúrgicos eletivos na mama é tão seguro e eficiente quanto a intubação traqueal, com a vantagem de desencadear menor resposta hemodinâmica durante a sua execução e menor incidência de dor de garganta e disfagia nas primeiras horas de pós-operatório.

Palavras-chave

Equipamentos, Máscaras laríngeas, Complicações, Anestesia geral

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Supraglottic airway devices are increasingly used as an option to tracheal intubation for elective procedures of varying complexity. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the clinical use of the laryngeal mask airway Supreme® (LMAS) in patients undergoing elective breast surgery and compare it with endotracheal tube (ETT). METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing breast procedures under general anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups according to the device used (LMAS or ETT). Time of insertion, number of insertion attempts, hemodynamic response to insertion, presence of blood on the device used; and incidence of sore throat, dysphagia, nausea and vomiting were assessed postoperatively. RESULTS: There was no difference between groups regarding time of insertion, number of attempts for successful insertion, and presence of blood on the device. Heart rate and blood pressure after insertion were higher in ETT group. Incidence of sore throat and dysphagia was also higher in ETT group after two hours in the postoperative period. There was no difference regarding incidence and severity of complications evaluated after six hours postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the LMAS technique to access airway during general anesthesia for elective breast surgery is as safe and effective as tracheal intubation, with the advantage of promoting smaller hemodynamic response during its management and lower incidence of sore throat and dysphagia in the first hours after surgery.

Keywords

Equipment, Laryngeal mask airway, Complications, General anesthesia

References

Stauffer JL, Olson DE, Petty TL. Complications and consequences of endotraqueal intubation and tracheotomy. Am J Med. 1981;70:65-76.

Grillo HC, Donahue DM, Mathisen DJ. Postintubation tracheal stenosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1995;109:486-93.

Ferdinende P, Kim D. Prevention of postintubation laryngotraqueal stenosis. Acta Otorhinolarymgol Belg. 1995;49:341-6.

Verghese C, Ramaswamy B. LMA-SupremeTM: A new single-use LMATM with gastric access: a report on its clinical efficacy. Br J Anaesth. 2008;101:405-10.

Timmermann A, Cremer S, Eich C. Prospective clinical and fiberoptic evaluation of the Supreme laryngeal mask airwayTM. Anesthesiology. 2009;110:262-5.

O'Connor CJ, Davies SR, Stix MS. "Soap bubbles" and "gauze thread" drain tube tests. Anesth Analg. 2001;93:1078-82.

Brimacombe JR. ProSeal LMA for ventilation and airway protection. Laryngeal mask anesthesia. 2005:528-30.

Cook TM, Woodall N, Frerk C. Major complications of airway management in the UK: results of the 4th National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Difficult Airway Society. Part 1: Anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 2011;106:617-31.

Brain AIJ, Verghese C, Strube PJ. The LMA "ProSeal": a laryngeal mask with an oesophageal vent. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84:650-4.

Brimacombe JR, Keller C. The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: A randomized crossover study with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed, anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology. 2000;93:104-9.

Ali A, Canturk S, Turkmen A. Comparison of the laryngeal mask airway Supreme and laryngeal mask airway Classic in adults. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009;26:1010-4.

Abdi W, Amathieu R, Adhoum A. Sparing the larynx during gynecological laparoscopy: a randomized trial comparing the LMA Supreme and the ETT. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2010;54:141-6.

Yu SH, Beirne OR. Laryngeal mask airways have a lower risk of airway complications compared with endotracheal intubation: a systematic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68:2359-76.

Hohlrieder M, Brimacombe J, von Goedecke A. Postoperative nausea, vomiting, airway morbidity, and analgesic requirements are lower for the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway than the tracheal tube in females undergoing breast and gynaecological surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2007;99:576-80.

Kumagai A, Iwasaki H, Kawana S. Laryngeal mask airway does not reduce the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting after gynaecological surgery. Anesth Analg. 1996;81.

Zhang GH, Xue FS, Sun HY. Comparative study of hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation with intubating laryngeal mask airway. Chin Med J. 2006;119:899-904.

Lim Y, Goel S, Brimacombe JR. The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway is an effective alternative to laryngoscope-guided tracheal intubation for gynaecological laparoscopy. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2007;35:52-6.

5dd3ef210e8825745ac63494 rba Articles
Links & Downloads
2352-2291 (Electronic) 0104-0014 (Printed)
Braz J Anesthesiol ©2024 All rights reserved.

Braz J Anesthesiol

Share this page
Page Sections