LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Laryngeal tube suction II or endotracheal intubation for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in a head down position: A randomised controlled trial

Photo from wikipedia

BACKGROUND The laryngeal tube suction II (LTS II) is a supraglottic airway device (SAD) with a gastric drainage tube and enhanced seal properties as compared with other SADs. Therefore, its… Click to show full abstract

BACKGROUND The laryngeal tube suction II (LTS II) is a supraglottic airway device (SAD) with a gastric drainage tube and enhanced seal properties as compared with other SADs. Therefore, its use has been proposed in situations with an elevated risk of aspiration. OBJECTIVES To compare the safety and efficacy of airway management and controlled mechanical ventilation when using either an LTS II or an endotracheal tube for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. DESIGN Randomised, controlled, blinded and single-centre study. SETTING Academic tertiary care centre in Leipzig from April 2014 to May 2015. PATIENTS It was planned to include 100 patients but the study was stopped after 50 patients following an interim analysis. These 50 patients were randomised to either the LTS II group or the endotracheal tube group. All male patients aged more than 18 years for elective laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were eligible. Exclusion criteria included a BMI more than 30, American Society of Anesthesiologists class III or greater, a history of gastroesophageal reflux or other factors known to increase the risk of aspiration and a known difficult airway. INTERVENTIONS All patients received general anaesthesia. Airway management was with either a LTS II or an endotracheal tube, according to the randomisation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary endpoint was successful insertion of the particular airway device during anaesthesia for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. RESULTS In 15 of the 28 patients randomised to LTS II, the device had to be removed and an endotracheal tube inserted, mainly because of an airway leak (n = 10) or swelling of the tongue (n = 3). Ventilation was successful in all patients (n = 22) randomised to endotracheal tube. Quality of ventilation was rated better in the endotracheal tube group. CONCLUSION Our data suggest that LTS II should not be the preferred method of airway management in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION DRKS00008985 (German Clinical Trials Register).

Keywords: laparoscopic radical; tube; laryngeal tube; endotracheal tube; radical prostatectomy

Journal Title: European Journal of Anaesthesiology
Year Published: 2017

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.