Download PDF
Anästhesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther 2011; 46(9): 598-607
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1286612
Fachwissen
Anästhesiologie-Topthema: Atemwegsmanagement
© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Atemwegsmanagement – Supraglottische Atemwegshilfen

Supraglottic airway devices
Berthold Bein
,
Helga Francksen
,
Markus Steinfath
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
05 September 2011 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Nicht zuletzt aufgrund des überwältigenden Erfolgs der Larynxmaske haben supraglottische Atemwegshilfen einen beispiellosen Siegeszug in der modernen Anästhesie erlebt und neben Weiterentwicklungen der klassischen Larynxmaske werden ständig auch neue supraglottische Atemwegshilfen entwickelt und auf den Markt gebracht. Im Gegensatz zu den Atemwegshilfen der 1. Generation ohne Möglichkeit der gastralen Drainage wie der Larynxmaske Classic und dem Larynxtubus verfügen Geräte der 2. Generation über einen gastralen Drainagekanal und/oder bieten eine bessere Dichtigkeit bei kontrollierter Beatmung (Larynxmaske ProSeal und Larynxtubus S). In letzter Zeit haben vor allem die zum einmaligen Gebrauch entwickelten Versionen dieser Atemwegshilfen und die neuartige I-Gel-Maske verstärktes Interesse gefunden. Die Eignung der Larynxmaske und der Larynxmaske ProSeal für Routineanästhesien und auch das Management des schwierigen Atemwegs ist in zahlreichen Untersuchungen gezeigt worden. Theoretisch ist eine Limitation aller Larynxmasken der fehlende Schutz gegen Aspiration, und es ist derzeit noch unklar, ob Atemwegshilfen mit gastraler Drainagemöglichkeit in dieser Hinsicht wesentliche Vorteile bieten.

Abstract

Supraglottic airway devices are developed with increasing frequency following the overwhelming success of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA). In contrast to the first generation devices such as the 'classic' LMA and the laryngeal tube second generation devices usually offer an oesophageal drainage tube and/or an improved oropharyngeal leak pressure during positive pressure ventilation such as the laryngeal mask ProSeal and the laryngeal tube S. Recently the disposable versions of these supraglottic airway devices and the novel I-Gel mask have gained increasing interest. Both the LMA and the PLMA have been shown to be perfectly suitable for routine anaesthesia and emergency airway management. While the lacking protection against aspiration is still considered a major limitation of the LMA, the value of airway devices with an oesophageal drainage tube in this respect remains untermined at present.

Kernaussagen

  • Die Larynxmaske stellt derzeit die am besten evaluierte supraglottische Atemwegshilfe dar.

  • Im Vergleich zur Larynxmaske zeigt der Larynxtubus eine höhere Atemwegsmorbidität.

  • Nach wie vor stellen u. a. fehlende Nüchternheit und Adipositas permagna Kontraindikationen für die Anwendung einer Larynxmaske dar. Allerdings ist die wahre Inzidenz von Aspirationen bei Anwendung einer Larynxmaske unklar.

  • Obwohl ständig neue Atemwegshilfen entwickelt und auf den Markt gebracht werden, ist es sinnvoll, sich nur mit 1 bis 2 erprobten Geräten intensiv zu beschäftigen, um ihre Anwendung sicher zu beherrschen.

  • Neue supraglottische Atemwegshilfen müssen dem ”Goldstandard“ der etablierten Larynxmaske bzw. ihrem Einweg-Pendant hinsichtlich Effektivität und Sicherheit mindestens ebenbürtig sein.

  • Um neue supraglottische Atemwegshilfen vergleichen zu können, sollten standardisierte Kriterien definiert werden, die mindestens die wichtigsten Endpunkte umfassen, wie

    • Erfolgsrate,

    • Zeit bis zur 1. suffizienten Ventilation,

    • Dichtigkeit und

    • Atemwegsmorbidität.

Schlüsselwörter:

Larynxmaske - Larynxtubus - Atemwegshilfe - Narkosebeatmung

Key words:

laryngeal mask airway - laryngeal tube - airway device - routine anaesthesia

Ergänzendes Material

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Brimacombe J, Keller C. The Elisha airway device: supraglottic and infraglottic, or simply extraglottic?. Anesth Analg author reply 2005; 100
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 McIntyre JW. Oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal airways: I (1880-1995). Can J Anaesth 1996; 43: 629-635
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Charters P. Airway devices: where now and where to?. Br J Anaesth 2000; 85: 504-505
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Brain AI. The development of the Laryngeal Mask – a brief history of the invention, early clinical studies and experimental work from which the Laryngeal Mask evolved. Eur J Anaesthesiol Suppl 1991; 4: 5-17
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Brain AI. The laryngeal mask – a new concept in airway management. Br J Anaesth 1983; 55: 801-805
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Nakayama S, Osaka Y, Yamashita M. The rotational technique with a partially inflated laryngeal mask airway improves the ease of insertion in children. Paediatr Anaesth 2002; 12: 416-419
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Brimacombe J. Analysis of 1500 laryngeal mask uses by one anaesthetist in adults undergoing routine anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1996; 51: 76-80
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Verghese C, Brimacombe JR. Survey of laryngeal mask airway usage in 11910 patients: safety and efficacy for conventional and nonconventional usage. Anesth Analg 1996; 82: 129-133
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Kihara S, Yaguchi Y, Brimacombe J et al. Intubating laryngeal mask airway size selection: a randomized triple crossover study in paralyzed, anesthetized male and female adult patients. Anesth Analg table of contents 2002; 94
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Asai T, Kawashima A, Hidaka I, Kawachi S. The laryngeal tube compared with the laryngeal mask: insertion, gas leak pressure and gastric insufflation. Br J Anaesth 2002; 89: 729-732
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Bein B, Carstensen S, Gleim M et al. A comparison of the proseal laryngeal mask airway, the laryngeal tube S and the oesophageal-tracheal combitube during routine surgical procedures. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2005; 22: 341-346
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Matioc AA, Arndt G. The laryngeal tube and pharyngeal mucosal pressure. Can J Anaesth author reply 2003; 50
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Heuer JF, Stiller M, Rathgeber J et al. Evaluation of the new supraglottic airway devices Ambu AuraOnce and Intersurgical i-gel. Positioning, sealing, patient comfort and airway morbidity. Anaesthesist 2009; 58: 813-820
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Lopez-Gil M, Brimacombe J, Alvarez M. Safety and efficacy of the laryngeal mask airway. A prospective survey of 1400 children. Anaesthesia 1996; 51: 969-972
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Brimacombe J. The advantages of the LMA over the tracheal tube or facemask a meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth 1995; 42: 1017-1023
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Benumof JL. Use of the laryngeal mask airway to facilitate fiberscope-aided tracheal intubation. Anesth Analg 1992; 74: 313-315
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Oczenski W, Krenn H, Dahaba AA et al. Hemodynamic and catecholamine stress responses to insertion of the Combitube, laryngeal mask airway or tracheal intubation. Anesth Analg 1999; 88: 1389-1394
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Wood ML, Forrest ET. The haemodynamic response to the insertion of the laryngeal mask airway: a comparison with laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1994; 38: 510-513
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Joshi GP, Inagaki Y, White PF et al. Use of the laryngeal mask airway as an alternative to the tracheal tube during ambulatory anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1997; 85: 573-577
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Akhtar TM, McMurray P, Kerr WJ, Kenny GN. A comparison of laryngeal mask airway with tracheal tube for intra-ocular ophthalmic surgery. Anaesthesia 1992; 47: 668-671
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Macario A, Chang PC, Stempel DB, Brock-Utne JG. A cost analysis of the laryngeal mask airway for elective surgery in adult outpatients. Anesthesiology 1995; 83: 250-257
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Bilgin H, Bozkurt M. Tracheal intubation using the ILMA, C-Trach or McCoy laryngoscope in patients with simulated cervical spine injury. Anaesthesia 2006; 61: 685-691
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Bannon L, Brimacombe J, Nixon T, Keller C. Repeat autoclaving does not remove protein deposits from the classic laryngeal mask airway. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2005; 22: 515-517
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Spielman FJ. Complete separation of the tube from the mask during removal of a disposable laryngeal mask airway. Can J Anaesth 2002; 49: 990-992
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Brimacombe J, Keller C, Morris R, Mecklem D. A comparison of the disposable versus the reusable laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed adult patients. Anesth Analg 1998; 87: 921-924
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Cao MM, Webb T, Bjorksten AR. Comparison of disposable and reusable laryngeal mask airways in spontaneously ventilating adult patients. Anaesth Intensive Care 2004; 32: 530-534
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Francksen H, Bein B, Cavus E et al. Comparison of LMA Unique, Ambu laryngeal mask and Soft Seal laryngeal mask during routine surgical procedures. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2007; 24: 134-140
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Van Zundert AA, Fonck K, Al-Shaikh B, Mortier E. Comparison of the LMA-classic with the new disposable soft seal laryngeal mask in spontaneously breathing adult patients. Anesthesiology 2003; 99: 1066-1071
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Asai T, Shingu K. Time-related cuff pressures of the laryngeal tube with and without the use of nitrous oxide. Anesth Analg table of contents 2004; 98
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Dorges V, Ocker H, Wenzel V, Schmucker P. The laryngeal tube: a new simple airway device. Anesth Analg 2000; 90: 1220-1222
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Brimacombe J, Keller C, Brimacombe L. A comparison of the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal and the laryngeal tube airway in paralyzed anesthetized adult patients undergoing pressure-controlled ventilation. Anesth Analg table of contents 1996; 43
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Cook TM, McCormick B, Asai T. Randomised comparison of the laryngeal tube and the laryngeal mask during anaesthesia with controlled ventilation. Anaesthesia 2003; 58: 508-508
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Cook TM, Cranshaw J. Randomized crossover comparison of ProSeal(R) Laryngeal Mask Airway with Laryngeal Tube Sonda(R) during anaesthesia with controlled ventilation. Br J Anaesth 2005; 95: 261-266
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Chiu CL, Murugasu J, Chan L. The use of modified VBM laryngeal tube compared to Laryngeal Mask Airway during spontaneous ventilation. Anaesth Intensive Care 2003; 31: 187-192
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Asai T, Murao K, Shingu K. Efficacy of the laryngeal tube during intermittent positive-pressure ventilation. Anaesthesia 2000; 55: 1099-1102
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Miller DM, Youkhana I, Pearce AC. The laryngeal mask and VBM laryngeal tube compared during spontaneous ventilation. A pilot study. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2001; 18: 593-598
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Wrobel M, Grundmann U, Wilhelm W et al. Laryngeal tube versus laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetised non-paralysed patients. A comparison of handling and postoperative morbidity. Anaesthesist 2004; 53: 702-708
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Brimacombe J, Keller C, Roth W, Loeckinger A. Large cuff volumes impede posterior pharyngeal mucosal perfusion with the laryngeal tube airway. Can J Anaesth 2002; 49: 1084-1087
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Figueredo E, Martinez M, Pintanel T. A comparison of the ProSeal laryngeal mask and the laryngeal tube in spontaneously breathing anesthetized patients. Anesth Analg table of contents 2003; 96
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Cook TM, McKinstry C, Hardy R, Twigg S. Randomized crossover comparison of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway with the Laryngeal Tube during anaesthesia with controlled ventilation. Br J Anaesth 2003; 91: 678-683
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Richebe P, Semjen F, Cros AM, Maurette P. Clinical assessment of the laryngeal tube in pediatric anesthesia. Paediatr Anaesth 2005; 15: 391-396
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Genzwuerker HV, Hohl E, Rapp HJ. Ventilation with the laryngeal tube in pediatric patients undergoing elective ambulatory surgery. Paediatr Anaesth 2005; 15: 385-390
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Amini A, Zand F, Sadeghi SE. A comparison of the disposable vs. the reusable laryngeal tube in paralysed adult patients. Anaesthesia 2007; 62: 1167-1170
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Wiese CH, Semmel T, Muller JU et al. The use of the laryngeal tube disposable (LT-D) by paramedics during out-of-hospital resuscitation – an observational study concerning ERC guidelines 2005. Resuscitation 2009; 80: 194-198
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Brain AI, Verghese C, Strube PJ. The LMA 'ProSeal' – a laryngeal mask with an oesophageal vent. Br J Anaesth 2000; 84: 650-654
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Cook TM, Lee G, Nolan JP. The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: a review of the literature. Can J Anaesth 2005; 52: 739-760
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Howath A, Brimacombe J, Keller C. Gum-elastic bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: a new technique. Anaesth Intensive Care 2002; 30: 624-627
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Keller C, Brimacombe J, Kleinsasser A, Loeckinger A. Does the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway prevent aspiration of regurgitated fluid?. Anesth Analg 2000; 91: 1017-1020
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Cook TM, Nolan JP, Verghese C et al. Randomized crossover comparison of the proseal with the classic laryngeal mask airway in unparalysed anaesthetized patients. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88: 527-533
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Verghese C, Ramaswamy B. LMA-Supreme – a new single-use LMA with gastric access: a report on its clinical efficacy. Br J Anaesth 2008; 101: 405-410
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 51 Lopez AM, Valero R, Hurtado P et al. Comparison of the LMA SupremeTM with the LMA ProsealTM for airway management in patients anaesthetized in prone position. Br J Anaesth 2011;
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 52 Tham HM, Tan SM, Woon KL, Zhao YD. A comparison of the Supreme laryngeal mask airway with the Proseal laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized paralyzed adult patients: a randomized crossover study. Can J Anaesth 2010; 57: 672-678
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 53 Chew EE, Hashim NH, Wang CY. Randomised comparison of the LMA Supreme with the I-Gel in spontaneously breathing anaesthetised adult patients. Anaesth Intensive Care 2010; 38: 1018-1022
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 54 Francksen H, Renner J, Hanss R et al. A comparison of the i-gel with the LMA-Unique in non-paralysed anaesthetised adult patients. Anaesthesia 2009; 64: 1118-1124
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 55 Theiler LG, Kleine-Brueggeney M, Kaiser D et al. Crossover comparison of the laryngeal mask supreme and the i-gel in simulated difficult airway scenario in anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology 2009; 111: 55-62
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 56 Weber U, Oguz R, Potura LA et al. Comparison of the i-gel and the LMA-Unique laryngeal mask airway in patients with mild to moderate obesity during elective short-term surgery. Anaesthesia 481-487
    PubMed
  • 57 Shin WJ, Cheong YS, Yang HS, Nishiyama T. The supraglottic airway I-gel in comparison with ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and classic laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2010; 27: 598-601
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 58 Singh I, Gupta M, Tandon M. Comparison of Clinical Performance of I-Gel with LMA-Proseal in Elective Surgeries. Indian journal of anaesthesia 2009; 53: 302-305
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 59 Teoh WHL, Lee KM, Suhitharan T et al. Comparison of the LMA Supreme vs. the i-gel in paralysed patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery with controlled ventilation. Anaesthesia 2010; 65: 1173-1179
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 60 Schmidbauer W, Bercker S, Volk T et al. Oesophageal seal of the novel supralaryngeal airway device I-Gel in comparison with the laryngeal mask airways Classic and ProSeal using a cadaver model. Br J Anaesth 2009; 102: 135-139
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 61 Gibbison B, Cook TM, Seller C. Case series: Protection from aspiration and failure of protection from aspiration with the i-gel airway. Br J Anaesth 2008; 100: 415-417
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 62 Doerges V, Ocker H, Wenzel V et al. The Laryngeal Tube S: A Modified Simple Airway Device. Anesth Analg 2003; 96: 618-621
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 63 Roth H, Genzwuerker HV, Rothhaas A et al. The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and the laryngeal tube Suction for ventilation in gynaecological patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2005; 22: 117-122
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 64 Gaitini LA, Vaida SJ, Somri M et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway with the Laryngeal Tube Suction in mechanically ventilated patients. Anesthesiology 2004; 101: 316-320
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 65 Miller DM, Light D. Storage capacities of the laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube compared and their relevance to aspiration risk during positive pressure ventilation. Anesth Analg table of contents 2003; 96
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 66 Thee C, Serocki G, Doerges V et al. Laryngeal tube S II, laryngeal tube S disposable, Fastrach laryngeal mask and Fastrach laryngeal mask disposable during elective surgery: a randomized controlled comparison between reusable and disposable supraglottic airway devices. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2010; 27: 468-472
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 67 Abdi W, Dhonneur G, Amathieu R et al. LMA supreme versus facemask ventilation performed by novices: a comparative study in morbidly obese patients showing difficult ventilation predictors. Obesity surgery 2009; 19: 1624-1630
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 68 Natalini G, Franceschetti ME, Pantelidi MT et al. Comparison of the standard laryngeal mask airway and the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in obese patients. Br J Anaesth 2003; 90: 323-326
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 69 Zoremba M, Aust H, Eberhart L et al. Comparison between intubation and the laryngeal mask airway in moderately obese adults. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009; 53: 436-442
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 70 Bernardini A, Natalini G. Risk of pulmonary aspiration with laryngeal mask airway and tracheal tube: analysis on 65712 procedures with positive pressure ventilation. Anaesthesia 2009; 64: 1289-1294
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 71 Cook TM, Woodall N, Frerk C. Major complications of airway management in the UK: results of the Fourth National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Difficult Airway Society. Part 1: anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2011; 106: 617-631
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 72 LMA Deutschland: Gebrauchsanweisung PLMA. 2011: 18-18
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar