AJA Asian Journal of Anesthesiology

Advancing, Capability, Improving lives

Case Report
Volume 48, Issue 1, Pages 37-40
Hung-Shu Chen 1.2 , Ping-Hsin Liu 1 , Kao-Chi Chung 2 , Kuo-ChuanHung 1
1062 Views


Abstract

The ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) offers a more effective seal and is easier for gastric tube placement to prevent aspiration than the classical laryngeal mask airway. However, it is more difficult to insert with the digital and introducer tooling techniques. The Rusch Flexi-Slip stylet (RFSS) is an accessory intubation tool that consists of a malleable coated wire and a soft atraumatic tip. It has been reported that it can facilitate easier insertion of the PLMA. Here, we report two cases in which the PLMA could not be inserted correctly on the initial attempts, and with successful placement of the PLMA after using an RFSS. In the first case, three attempts to insert the PLMA with the digital and introducer tooling techniques were unsuccessful. The second case was known to be difficult for PLMA placement because, in a previous operation, PLMA insertion for general anesthesia was unsuccessful, and in that instance required endotracheal intubation for general anesthesia. In both cases, the PLMA was successfully inserted using the RFSS technique, without difficulty. The RFSS technique offers several advantages for PLMA insertion, including the provision of effective support and a soft tip for the PLMA insertion. Other techniques to facilitate the insertion of the PLMA, including priming the drain tube with a guide are discussed. We recommend that the RFSS technique offers an effective method for cases with difficult insertion of the PLMA.

Keywords

laryngeal masks: ProSeal™; Rusch Flexi-Slip stylet;


1. Introduction

The ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway (PLMA; Laryngeal Mask Company North America, San Diego, CA, USA) was first introduced by Brain et al in 2000.1 They re-ported that the PLMA can form a more effective seal than the classic laryngeal mask airway and facilitate gastric  tube  placement  to  prevent  aspiration.  Traditionally, the PLMA may be inserted with a fin-ger,  as  for  the  classic  laryngeal  mask  airway,  or  with an introducer tool, as described in the manu-facturer’s instructions.2 However, because it lacks a semi-rigid backplate, the PLMA cuff is softer than or-dinary laryngeal mask airway cuffs and folding-over malposition is more likely to occur with the PLMA.3 A  new  technique  using  the  Rusch  Flexi-Slip  stylet  (RFSS;  no.  503000-4.3/5.6;  Willy  Ruesch  GmbH,  Kernen, Germany) was recently reported to facili-tate  the  insertion  of  the  PLMA.4  The  RFSS  tech-nique provides an internal supporting structure to prevent  folding  of  the  soft  cuff  and  thus  avoid  malposition.  Furthermore,  a  90º  angle  of  the  air-way  tube  that  is  conformable  to  the  anatomy  of the oropharynx can facilitate correct insertion. We present two cases in which correct insertion of the  PLMA  was  not  possible  with  traditional  tech-niques,  but  was  successfully  remedied  using  the  RFSS technique.

2. Case Reports

2.1. Case

A  38-year-old  male  patient  (body  weight,  83  kg;  height,  161  cm)  was  scheduled  for  elective  left  herniorrhaphy  under  general  anesthesia.  His  past  history included hypertension with medical control for 3 years. Preoperative airway evaluation revealed no airway anomalies. In the operating room, the pa-tient was given 150 μg of fentanyl, 450 mg of thiamy-lal, and 100 mg of 2% lidocaine to induce anesthesia. A size 5 PLMA was inserted with the introducer tool technique2  when  there  was  no  response  to  jaw  thrust.5 The initial insertion of the PLMA failed be-cause  it  was  difficult  to  slide  the  PLMA  into  the  pharynx.  On  the  second  attempt,  a  slight  lateral  approach was used but tactile resistance was still felt  at  the  back  of  the  mouth  and  the  bite  block almost protruded from the mouth. On the third at-tempt,  digital  manipulation2  was  unsuccessfully  used. Some blood was noted on the PLMA after the three  attempts.  Ventilation  was  well  maintained  with  100%  oxygen  via  a  facemask  without  hypox-emia  (SpO2 <  90%)  between  each  insertion.  At  the  fourth approach, the PLMA was successfully inserted by applying the RFSS technique,4 which involved the following steps: (1) the stylet was inserted into the proximal end of the PLMA drainage tube and pushed forward  until  the  tip  reached  approximately  1.0−2.0  cm  from  the  distal  end  of  the  drain  tube;  (2)  after bending the proximal end of the stylet back-ward to 180º, the PLMA/stylet setting was bent to a 90º angle around the laryngeal portion of the PLMA (Figure  1);  (3)  the  PLMA/stylet  setting  was  ad-vanced into the mouth and the tip was rotated cau-dad into the different axes of the oropharynx with a simple wrist motion, similar to that used to insert a laryngoscope behind the base of the tongue; and (4) the stylet was removed while the laryngeal mask passed the base of the tongue. After insertion, the cuff was inflated with air to a pressure of 60 cmH2O. The  oropharyngeal  leak  pressure  was  36  cmH2O, and no air leakage was detected from the drainage tube.  Positive  pressure  ventilation  was  started  at  a tidal volume of 600 mL and a respiratory rate of 12  breaths/min.  The  peak  airway  pressure  was  25 cmH2O. A well-lubricated 14-F suction tube was inserted  through  the  drainage  tube.  Anesthesia  was maintained with 3% sevoflurane in oxygen and an  additional  dose  of  cisatracurium  (4  mg)  was  given for surgical relaxation. SpO2 was maintained throughout the surgical procedure at around 100% with end-tidal carbon dioxide < 45 mmHg.

Figure  1
Download full-size image
The ProSeal™/stylet setting. (A) The ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway/stylet setting is bent to a 90º angle around the laryngeal portion of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway; the optimal length of the rigid portion is 4.0−6.0 cm. (B) The tip of the stylet is approximately 1.0−2.0 cm from the distal end of the drain tube (arrow).

At the end of the surgical procedure, anesthesia was discontinued and the PLMA was removed as the patient’s reflexes returned. The patient was then transferred to the recovery room. In the recovery room,  the  patient  complained  of  mild  throat  dis-comfort and dysphagia. Postoperative pain control was  provided  by  intravenous  meperidine  (50  mg).  One hour later, the patient felt better and was re-turned to the ward. At the postanesthetic visit the next day, there were no further complaints and the patient’s sore throat and dysphagia were improving. On postanesthetic day 3, the pharyngolaryngeal dis-comfort  had  completely  abated.  The  patient  was  discharged 4 days later from hospital without any sequelae.

2.2. Case 2

A  77-year-old  male  (body  weight,  108  kg;  height,  165  cm)  with  a  varus  deformity  of  the  left  knee  joint  was  scheduled  for  total  left  knee  replace-ment.  Contralateral  total  knee  replacement  had  been carried out 11 months earlier under general anesthesia. In the previous general anesthesia, the PLMA  could  not  be  inserted,  despite  more  than  three  attempts  using  various  techniques.  The  pa-tient  ultimately  required  endotracheal  intubation  for general anesthesia.

At  this  admission,  the  patient  refused  regional  anesthesia for personal reasons. In compliance with the patient’s request, it was decided to induce gen-eral  anesthesia  after  inserting  the  PLMA  using  the  new RFSS technique. After the patient was preoxy-genated for 5 minutes, anesthesia was induced with 150 μg of fentanyl, 200 mg of propofol, 4 mg of cisa-tracurium, and 60 mg of 2% lidocaine. A size 5 PLMA was  inserted  using  the  RFSS  technique  because  of  unresponsiveness  to  the  jaw  thrust.5 The insertion of  the  PLMA  was  smooth  and  uneventful.  The  cuff  was inflated with air to a pressure of 60 cmH2O, and the lungs were easily inflated. Oro pharyngeal leak pressure was 32 cmH2O, and there was no air leak-age from the drainage tube. After inserting a 14-F suction  tube  through  the  drainage  tube,  positive  pressure ventilation was started at a tidal volume of 700 mL and a respiratory rate of 12 breaths/min. The peak  airway  pressure  was  23  cmH2O  and  the  end-tidal carbon dioxide was maintained at < 45 mmHg. Anesthesia  was  maintained  with  6%  desflurane  in  oxygen. At the end of the operation, the PLMA was removed once the patient was fully awake. No blood was visible on the PLMA. In the recovery room, the patient  only  complained  of  discomfort  in  his  left  knee  and  was  returned  to  the  ward  1  hour  later.  There  were  no  complaints  related  to  anesthesia  during postoperative visits. He was discharged un-eventfully from hospital 6 days later.

3. Discussion

The PLMA has a second posterior cuff to improve the seal and a drainage tube to reduce gastric inflation and regurgitation.1 Although the manufacturer rec-ommends digital manipulation or an introducer tool to insert the PLMA, the success rate of both tech-niques on the first attempt is lower than that classic laryngeal mask airways.6−8 The lack of a supporting structure in the soft laryngeal mask means that the insertion may be impeded due to impaction of the PLMA at the back of the mouth or due to folding of the cuff.

The  PLMA  drainage  tube  communicates  with  the upper esophageal sphincter and permits vent-ing of the stomach and blind insertion of a stand-ard gastric tube. In addition to inserting a gastric tube,  the  drainage  tube  provides  an  additional  value to facilitate PLMA insertion. Many techniques have been reported to facilitate PLMA insertion,8−10 most  of  which  involve  priming  the  drainage  tube  with a guide, which enables the PLMA to slide into place along the guide. Blind advancement of a suc-tion  catheter  was  reported  to  show  a  higher  suc-cess  rate  and  cause  less  mouth  trauma  than  the  digital technique in one series.9 However, the suc-tion  tube  may  be  insufficiently  rigid  to  guide  the  distal  cuff  around  the  oropharynx,  particularly  if  the oropharyngeal axis is less than 90º, and impac-tion  can  still  occur.  Furthermore,  iatrogenic  inju-ries  of  the  upper  gastrointestinal  tract  are  often  associated  with  blind  insertion  of  the  flexible  tubes.11 Brimacombe et al reported that PLMA in-sertion  by  direct  laryngoscopic  placement  of  a  gum-elastic  bougie  into  the  esophagus  offered  a  very high success rate.8 It is necessary to place the stiff gum elastic bougie under direct vision using a laryngoscope  to  avoid  potential  complications  as-sociated  with  blind  intubation.12  On  the  other  hand,  this  technique  may  be  difficult  to  perform  by clinicians with less laryngoscopic experience or in  patients  whose  laryngeal  structure  cannot  be  easily viewed by laryngoscopy.

The  RFSS  is  made  of  a  malleable  coated  wire  that  retains  its  shape  after  adjustment  to  facili-tate endotracheal intubation. The RFSS also has a soft  atraumatic  tip  that  helps  to  prevent  tissue  damage  during  insertion.  Yodfat13  reported  that  the creation of a 90º angle on a rigid stylet placed close  to  the  laryngeal  portion  of  the  laryngeal  mask airway improves the rate of successful inser-tion. The same concept was applied in the devel-opment of the PLMA introducer tool and the Ambu laryngeal  mask.14  By  placing  the  airway  tube  and  the  internal  supporting  stylet  at  a  90º  angle  and  the use of an internal supporting stylet, the RFSS technique not only provides a contour to facilitate insertion of the PLMA, but also prevents the tip of the mask from being folded backward.4 These ad-vantages  are  very  useful  in  patients  who  tend  to  experience  impaction  of  the  PLMA  at  the  back  of  the mouth. The unsuccessful insertion in our first case was largely due to folding of the cuff and im-paction of the PLMA at the back of the mouth. This malposition  occurs  in  approximately  3%  of  cases  when the PLMA is inserted using the digital or the introducer tool techniques because the backplate is softer, and it was usually folded in the mid por-tion  of  the  bowl.3  By  partially  supporting  the  la-ryngeal  part  of  the  RFSS,  the  laryngeal  mask  is  strong enough to pass through the dropped tongue without folding the PLMA. Once the laryngeal mask is placed under the base of the tongue, the inflation of  the  cuff  will  adjust  the  laryngeal  mask  to  the  optimal position to match the contours of the pha-ryngeal and laryngeal surfaces. The soft distal end of the cuff could prevent the oropharynx from being harmed during the insertion. Postoperative discom-fort, as in Case 1, is probably due to repeated inser-tion of the PLMA rather than inserting the soft-tipped RFSS.  Further  studies  are  needed  to  confirm  this  hypothesis.

Our second case was a patient with morbid obes-ity (body mass index, 39.7 kg/m2). This patient had a past history of unsuccessful insertion of the PLMA using  traditional  techniques.  The  placement  of  a  classic laryngeal mask airway is usually contraindi-cated  in  grossly  or  morbidly  obese  patients  be-cause  of  the  increased  risk  of  regurgitation  and  the  need  for  high  airway  pressure  ventilation.15 The  PLMA  forms  a  better  seal  than  the  classical  laryngeal  mask  airway  and  its  drainage  tube  will  protect  the  lungs  from  regurgitated  gastric  con-tents if it is correctly placed.16 Keller et al’s study illustrated  that  the  PLMA  could  be  used  as  an  al-ternative ventilatory device in grossly and morbidly obese  patients.17  In  this  patient,  we  considered  that using the PLMA for the surgical procedure was appropriate  if  it  could  be  correctly  placed.  The  RFSS technique was used in this case because of its suitability in overcoming difficult insertion of the PLMA and the procedure was uneventful. No post-operative complications were noted.In  conclusion,  we  have  presented  two  cases  in whom PLMA insertion was initially unsuccessful using  standard  techniques,  but  the  insertion  was  successful when the RFSS technique was used. This new  technique  provides  an  effective  method  for  patients who have sustained or had previously ex-perienced unsuccessful PLMA insertion using tradi-tional  techniques.  The  PLMA  has  been  confirmed  to  be  useful  for  the  management  of  difficult  air-way. The new technique may improve the rate of successful PLMA use in difficult cases.

Acknowledgments

This study was financially supported by the Depart-ment of Anesthesiology, E-Da Hospital.


References

1
AIJ Brain, C Verghese, PJ Strube
The LMA ‘ProSeal’: a laryngeal mask with an oesophageal vent
Br J Anaesth, 84 (2000), pp. 650-654
2
Laryngeal Mask Company North America Inc.
ProSeal™ Instruction Manual (1st edition), LMA North America Inc., San Diego (2000)
Article  
3
J Brimacombe, S Kennaugh, A Berry, C Keller
Malposition of the ProSeal laryngeal mask [reply]
Anesth Analg, 94 (2002), p. 1367
Article   CrossRef  
4
HS Chen, PH Liu, KC Chung
The Rusch Flexi-Slip stylet for ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway insertion
Can J Anesth, 55 (2008), pp. 719-720
5
MP Drage, J Nunez, RS Vaughan, T Asai
Jaw thrusting as a clinical test to assess the adequate depth of anaesthesia for insertion of the laryngeal mask
Anaesthesia, 51 (1996), pp. 1167-1170
6
J Brimacombe, C Keller, B Fullekrug, F Agro, W Rosenblatt, SF Dierdorf, E Garcia de Lucas, et al.
A multicenter study comparing the ProSeal with the Classic laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized, nonparalyzed patients
Anesthesiology, 96 (2002), pp. 289-295
7
NR Evans, SV Gardner, MF James, JA King, P Roux, P Bennett, R Nattrass, et al.
The ProSeal laryngeal mask: results of a descriptive trial with experience of 300 cases
Br J Anaesth, 88 (2002), pp. 534-539
8
J Brimacombe, C Keller, D Vosoba Judd
Gum elastic bougie-guided insertion of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway is superior to the digital and introducer tool techniques
Anesthesiology, 100 (2004), pp. 25-29
9
R Garcia-Aguado, J Vinoles, J Brimacombe, M Vivo, R Lopez-Estudillo, G Ayala
Suction catheter guided insertion of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway is superior to the digital technique
Can J Anesth, 53 (2006), pp. 398-403
10
P Drolet, M Girard
An aid to correct positioning of the ProSeal laryngeal mask
Can J Anesth, 48 (2001), pp. 718-719
11
GG Ghahremani, MA Turner, RB Port
Iatrogenic intubation injuries of the upper gastrointestinal tract in adults
Gastrointest Radiol, 5 (1980), pp. 1-10
12
M Kadry, M Popat
Pharyngeal wall perforation: an unusual complication of blind intubation with a gum elastic bougie
Anaesthesia, 54 (1999), pp. 404-405
13
UA Yodfat
Modified technique for laryngeal mask airway insertion
Anesth Analg, 89 (1999), p. 1327
14
CA Hagberg, FS Jensen, HV Genzwuerker, R Krivosic-Horber, BU Schmitz, J Hinkelbein, M Contzen, et al.
A multicenter study of the Ambu laryngeal mask in non-paralyzed, anesthetized patients
Anesth Analg, 101 (2005), pp. 1862-1866
15
J Brimacombe, AIJ Brain, A Berry
The Laryngeal Mask Airway: Review and Practical Guide, WB Saunders, London (1997)
Article  
16
C Keller, J Brimacombe, A Kleinsasser, A Loeckinger
Does the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway prevent aspiration of regurgitated fluid?
Anesth Analg, 91 (2000), pp. 1017-1020
17
C Keller, J Brimacombe, A Kleinsasser, L Brimacombe
The laryngeal mask airway ProSeal™ as a temporary ventilatory device in grossly and morbidly obese patients before laryngoscope-guided tracheal intubation
Anesth Analg, 94 (2002), pp. 737-740

References

Close