Effect of Pneumoperitoneum and Lateral Position on Oropharyngeal Seal Pressures of Proseal LMA in Laparoscopic Urological Procedures

Journal Title: Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research - Year 2017, Vol 11, Issue 2

Abstract

Introduction: A sustained and effective oropharyngeal sealing with supraglottic airway is required to maintain the ventilation during laparoscopic surgery. Previous studies have observed the Oropharyngeal Seal Pressure (OSP) for Proseal Laryngeal Mask Airway (PLMA) after pneumoperitoneum in supine and trendelenburg position, where PLMA was found to be an effective airway device. This study was conducted with ProSeal LMA, for laparoscopic Urologic procedures done in lateral position. Aim: To measure OSP in supine and lateral position and to observe the effect of pneumoperitoneum in lateral position on OSP. Secondary objectives were to assess adequacy of ventilation and incidence of adverse events. Materials and Methods: A total number of 25 patients of American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status II and I were enrolled. After induction of anaesthesia using a standardized protocol, PLMA was inserted. Ryle’s tube was inserted through drain tube. The position of PLMA was confirmed with ease of insertion of Ryle’s tube and fibreoptic grading of vocal cords. Patients were then put in lateral position. The OSP was measured in supine position. This value was baseline comparison for OSP in lateral position and that after pneumoperitoneum. We assessed the efficacy of PLMA for ventilation, after carboperitoneum in lateral position (peak airway pressure, End Tidal Carbon dioxide (EtCO2 ), SPO2 ). Incidence of adverse effects (displacement of device, gastric insufflation, regurgitation, coughing, sore throat, blood on device, trauma) was also noted. Results: The OSP was above Peak Airway Pressure (PAP) in supine (22.1±5.4 and 15.4±4.49cm of H2 O) and lateral position (22.6±5.3 and 16.1±4.6). After pneumoperitoneum, which was in lateral position, there was statistically significant (p-value <0.05) increase in both PAP (19.96±4.015) and OSP (24.32±4.98, p-value 0.03). There was no intraoperative displacement of PLMA. There was no event of suboptimal oxygenation. EtCO2 was always within normal limits. Gastric insufflation was present in one patient. One patient had coughing and blood was detected on device. Three patients had throat discomfort post-operatively. Conclusion: In this study, Oropharyngeal seal pressures with PLMA were found to increase after pneumoperitoneum in lateral position. PLMA forms an effective seal around airway and is an efficient and safe alternative for airway management in urological laparoscopic surgeries done in lateral position.

Authors and Affiliations

Preeti Rustagi, Geeta A. Patkar, Anil kumar Ourasang, Bharati A. Tendolkar

Keywords

Related Articles

Cloves Syndrome: Severe Neonatal Presentation

Congenital Lipomatous Overgrowth, Vascular Malformations, Epidermal Nevi and Spinal Abnormalities (CLOVES syndrome) is a newly described and rare overgrowth disorder with serious morbidity. The course of this disease is...

Validity and Usefulness of Revised WHO Guidelines in Children with Dengue Fever

ABSTRACT Introduction: Dengue fever is the most rapidly spreading mosquito borne viral infection with a 30-fold increase in the disease burden over last five decades with a variable clinical course and outcome. The World...

Factors Influencing Nursing Students’ Clinical Judgment: A Qualitative Directed Content Analysis in an Iranian Context

Introduction: Clinical judgment is necessary for clinical decision making and enhancing it in nursing students improves health care quality. Since clinical judgment is an interactive phenomenon and dependent on context a...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP333228
  • DOI 10.7860/JCDR/2017/22168.9422
  • Views 80
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Preeti Rustagi, Geeta A. Patkar, Anil kumar Ourasang, Bharati A. Tendolkar (2017). Effect of Pneumoperitoneum and Lateral Position on Oropharyngeal Seal Pressures of Proseal LMA in Laparoscopic Urological Procedures. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 11(2), 5-9. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-333228