Features of new vision-incorporated third-generation video laryngeal mask airways
Tóm tắt
Numerous studies have shown that blindly inserted supraglottic airway devices (SADs) are sub-optimally placed in 50 to 80% of all cases. Placement under direct vision has been recommended. We describe the very first two new SADs of the third generation that incorporate a videoscope with flexible tip. Both devices are made up of two interlocking components—the SAD and a videoscope. The 3rd generation, direct vision SADs allow vision-guided insertion, corrective manoeuvres, if needed, and correct placement in the hypopharynx and possess additional features which permit insertion of a gastric tube and endotracheal intubation should the need arise. This article describes the two new devices’ physical characteristics, features, rationale for use, advantages and limitations in comparison to existing devices. Each of the two new devices—the Video Laryngeal Mask (VLMTM, UE Medical®) and the SafeLM® Video Laryngeal Mask System (SafeLMTM VLMS, Magill Medical Technology®) consist of two parts: (a) a disposable 2nd generation SAD with a silicone cuff and an anatomically curved tube; and (b) a reusable patient-isolated videoscope and monitoring screen, with the flexible scope located into a specially-designed, blind-end channel terminating in the bowl of the SAD, preventing the videoscope from contacting patient body fluids in the SAD bowl. Third generation placement-under-direct-vision supraglottic airway devices possess several theoretical safety and ease of use advantages which now need to be validated in clinical use.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Brain AIJ. The laryngeal mask—a new concept in airway management. Br J Anaesth. 1983;55:801–5.
Van Zundert TCRV, Brimacombe JR, Ferson DZ, Bacon DR, Wilkinson DJ. Archie brain: celebrating 30 years of development in laryngeal mask airways. Anaesthesia. 2012;67:1375–85.
Van Zundert AAJ, Kumar CM, Van Zundert TCRV, Gatt SP, Pandit JJ. The case for a 3rd generation supraglottic airway device facilitating direct vision placement. J Clin Monit Comput. 2021;35:217–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00537-4.
Danha RF, Thompson JL, Popat MT, Pandit JJ. Comparison of fibreoptic-guided orotracheal intubation through classic and single-use laryngeal mask airways. Anaesthesia. 2005;60:184–8.
Frerk C, Mitchell VS, McNarry AF, et al. Difficult Airway Society Intubation Guidelines Working Group. Difficult Airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults. Br J Anaesth. 2015;115:828–48.
Cook TM, Kelly FE. Time to abandon the ‘vintage’ laryngeal mask airway and adopt second-generation supraglottic airway devices as first choice. Br J Anaesth. 2015;115:497–9.
Van Zundert AA, Skinner MW, Van Zundert TC, Luney SR, Pandit JJ. Value of knowing physical characteristics of the airway device before using it. Br J Anaesth. 2016;117:12–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aew106.
Kumar CM, Van Zundert TC, Seet E, Van Zundert AA. Time to consider supraglottic airway device oropharyngeal leak pressure measurement more objectively. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2020;65:142–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.13727.
Van Zundert AAJ, Kumar CM, Van Zundert TCRV. Malpositioning of supraglottic airway devices: preventive and corrective strategies. Br J Anaesth. 2016;116:579–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aew104.
Van Zundert AAJ, Gatt SP, Kumar CM, Van Zundert TCRV, Pandit JJ. ‘Failed supraglottic airway’: an algorithm for suboptimally placed supraglottic airway devices based on videolaryngoscopy. Br J Anaesth. 2017;118:645–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aex093.
Joshi S, Sciacca RR, Solanki DR, Young WL, Mathru MM. A prospective evaluation of clinical tests for placement of laryngeal mask airways. Anesthesiology. 1998;89:1141–6.
Brimacombe JR. Laryngeal mask anesthesia—principles and practice. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2005. p. 97–9.
Van Zundert AAJ, Gatt SP, Kumar CM, van Zundert TCRV. Vision-guided placement of supraglottic airway device (SAD) prevents airway obstruction—a prospective audit. Br J Anaesth. 2017;118:462–3.
Shorten GD, Opie NJ, Graziotti P, Morris I, Khangure M. Assessment of upper airway anatomy in awake sedated and anaesthetized patients using magnetic resonance imaging. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1994;22:165–9.
Russo SG, Cremer S, Eich C, Jipp M, Cohnen J, Strack M, Quintel M, Mohr A. Magnetic resonance imaging study of the in vivo position of the extraglottic airway devices i-gelTM and the LMA-SupremeTM in anaesthetized human volunteers. Br J Anaesth. 2012;109:996–1004.
Aoyama K, Takenaka I, Sata T, Shigematsu A. The triple airway maoeuvre for insertion of the laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed patients. Can J Anaesth. 1995;42:1010–6.
Moustafa MA, Abdelhady MM. Fiberoptic assessment of the laryngeal mask airway (Laryseal) position after one hour of positive pressure ventilation: an observational study. J Clin Anesth. 2014;26:480–4.
Payne J. The use of the fibreoptic laryngoscope to confirm the position of the laryngeal mask. Anaesthesia. 1989;44:865.
Song K, Yi J, Liu W, Huang S, Huang Y. Confirmation of laryngeal mask airway placement by ultrasound examination: a pilot study. J Clin Anesth. 2016;34:638–46.
Kim J, Kim JY, Kim WO, Kil HK. An ultrasound evaluation of laryngeal mask airway position in pediatric patients: an observational study. Anesth Analg. 2015;120:427–32.
van Zundert AAJ, Wyssusek KH, Pelecanos A, Roets M, Kumar CM. A prospective randomized comparison of airway seal using the novel vision-guided insertion of LMA-Supreme® and LMA-Protector®. J Clin Monit Comput. 2020;34:285–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-019-00301-3.
Gómez-Ríos MÁ, Freire-Vila E, Casans-Francés R, Pita-Fernández S. The TotaltrackTM video laryngeal mask: an evaluation in 300 patients. Anaesthesia. 2019;74:751–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.14637.