AJA Asian Journal of Anesthesiology

Advancing, Capability, Improving lives

Research Paper
Volume 47, Issue 2, Pages 84-86
Ming-Hui Hsieh 1 , Jin-Te Ho 2 , Chin-Min Huang 3 , Meei-Shyuan Lee 4 , Ta-Liang Chen 1.5 , Chih-Shung Wong 6 , Jui-An Lin 1.7
1002 Views

Outline


Abstract

Removal of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) can be executed while patients are deeply anesthetized or awake. Recent publications have focused on suitable anesthetic concentrations in the brain for removal of LMA in anesthetized patients. Here, we describe an easy and safe method for removal of LMA during deep anesthesia.

Keywords

anesthesia recovery; period, emergence; laryngeal masks;


The timing of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) removal after surgery is controversial.1−11 A greater incidence of airway hyperreactivity and complications have been reported by some studies3,6,7 when the LMA is removed in the awake state as opposed to the anesthetized state. Recent publications12−15 on LMA removal in a deeply anesthetized state reported the end-tidal concentration of inhalational anesthetics (ETIA) necessary to achieve successful LMA removal in 50% (ED50) and 95% (ED95) of patients. In these studies, which had similar design, after completion of surgery, the oropharynx was gently cleared with suction before the depth of anesthesia was changed, and then the ETIA was adjusted to the predetermined level and maintained for at least 10 minutes to allow the concentration between the alveoli and brain to come to an equilibrium. Their methods, while able to provide an adequate brain concentration for LMA removal during deep anesthesia, might not be practical. Under clinical conditions, it is not usual to intentionally fix the ETIA for “at least” 10 minutes before LMA removal. In addition, the suggested ED95 for LMA removal applies to only 95% of patients, and jaw lift as well as mask ventilation for 5−10 minutes were also required.12,14,15

With institutional review board approval, upon the completion of minor plastic (debridement, skin graft) or urologic (cystoscopy, ureteroscopy) surgery (< 3 hours) under isoflurane anesthesia, we remove the LMA in deeply anesthetized adults following gentle suction of the oropharynx with the depth of anesthesia unchanged. The LMA is removed while still inflated to facilitate a more complete removal of salivary secretions.16 Following LMA removal, we routinely place an oral airway to keep the airway patent and check if ventilation is adequate according to three principles: observation (synchronized chest wall movement); audition (clear and loud breath sounds); and feel (feeling a hit of warm airflow during expiration). We do not use nasal airways for fear of epistaxis. Although nasal airways are usually better tolerated by patients than are oral airways when in light plane of anesthesia,17 placement of oral airways would not cause any obvious airway problems during emergence from isoflurane anesthesia if it is placed in deep plane of anesthesia. In addition, capnography and ETIA obtained by gassampling via a T-connector provide more information about airway patency and residual inhalational anesthetics. By using our method, jaw lift and assisted mask ventilation are usually not necessary; instead, a mask is placed over the patient’s mouth and nose to supply O2 and we just simply wait for the patient’s recovery. Time to obey the order “open your eyes” following LMA removal is 20−30 minutes. As the LMA is removed when the patient is in surgical plane of anesthesia, there should be no coughing, movements or any other airway complications requiring management.

Apnea or airway obstruction as indicated by a decline on pulse oximetry may be detected only belatedly if there is visible chest wall movement. Capnography accurately detects apnea or airway obstruction, which can improve patient safety during light anesthesia.18 It is better to obtain realtime ETIA data to know the patient’s status and how long it will take for the patient to awaken. Therefore, it is also necessary to monitor end-tidal gas concentration during the process of emergence. Modified bite guard has been reported to be helpful for measuring ETIA,19 but it might not be suitable for LMA removal in deep planes of anesthesia because the air passage is often blocked by the base of the tongue in deeply anesthetized patients.

During operation, a T-connector with tubing (Figure 1A, left white arrow) serves as an extension of the gas-sampling line (Figure 1A, right white arrow), with the Luer Lock connectors being linked well together (Figure 1A, white oval). After LMA removal, the rectangular end of the T-connector can be used to facilitate gas sampling and monitor the recovery state of patients during emergence. At first, we tried to link a T-connector to the end-tidal gas sampling line and put the rectangular end of the T-connector near the nostrils to obtain the gas data (Figure 1B). However, this method failed in almost every case (Figure 1D) with an oral airway placed in the oropharynx. The reason for failure could be related to the natural rules of fluid dynamics, which states that a fluid (can be liquid or gas) tends to flow through the route of least resistant to avoid external tension. In anesthetized patients with spontaneous breathing, loss of upper airway muscle tone allows the tongue base (sometimes even epiglottis) to fall back against the posterior pharyngeal wall. If we introduce an oral airway to solve the problem, the major gas outlet will become the mouth instead of the nostrils owing to the smaller and more resistive nasal passage. Thus, we then placed the rectangular end of the T-connector in the lateral channel of the oral airway (Figure 1C) and temporarily fixed the end to the lateral channel with tape. The waveform obtained with this method (Figure 1E) was almost identical to that obtained during LMA anesthesia. As we just put the rectangular end of the T-connector into the lateral channel (Figure 1C, white arrow) and not into the mouth, there is low possibility of occlusion of the sample line by secretions.

A point that needs to be stressed is that this method should only be performed in anesthetized adults with spontaneous ventilation. It is not suitable for patients with impaired ventilatory drive (e.g. curarization) because an oral airway can only provide upper airway patency.

This method was employed in over 300 ASA class I−II adults, and all recovered from anesthesia smoothly without any obvious complication. Most could obey the instruction to open their mouth for removal of the oral airway. If time permits, this safe and easy method of early LMA removal can be applied selectively in deeply anesthetized adult patients.

Figure 1
Download full-size image
Figure 1 (A) The T-connector as an extension of the gas-sampling line during surgery. (B) Gas sampling through nasal route with an adequate Berman airway placed following removal of laryngeal mask airway. (C) Gas sampling through oral route with an adequate Berman airway placed following removal of laryngeal mask airway. (D) Capnography obtained by gas sampling through nasal route. (E) Capnography obtained by gas sampling through oral route.

References

1
MB Baird, AH Mayor, AP Goodwin
Removal of the laryngeal mask airway: factors affecting the incidence of post-operative adverse respiratory events in 300 patients
Eur J Anaesthesiol, 16 (1999), pp. 251-256
2
S Dolling, NR Anders, SE Rolfe
A comparison of deep vs. awake removal of the laryngeal mask airway in paediatric dental daycase surgery. A randomised controlled trial
Anaesthesia, 58 (2003), pp. 1224-1228
3
PS Gataure, IP Latto, S Rust
Complications associated with removal of the laryngeal mask airway: a comparison of removal in deeply anaesthetised versus awake patients
Can J Anaesth, 42 (1995), pp. 1113-1116
4
DG Mason, RM Bingham
The laryngeal mask airway in children
Anaesthesia, 45 (1990), pp. 760-763
5
J Nunez, J Hughes, K Wareham, T Asai
Timing of removal of the laryngeal mask airway
Anaesthesia, 53 (1998), pp. 126-130
6
B O'Neill, JJ Templeton, L Caramico, MS Schreiner
The laryngeal mask airway in pediatric patients: factors affecting ease of use during insertion and emergence
Anesth Analg, 78 (1994), pp. 659-662
7
AL Pappas, R Sukhani, J Lurie, J Pawlowski, K Sawicki, A Corsino
Severity of airway hyperreactivity associated with laryngeal mask airway removal: correlation with volatile anesthetic choice and depth of anesthesia
J Clin Anesth, 13 (2001), pp. 498-503
8
JH Pennant, PF White
The laryngeal mask airway. Its uses in anesthesiology
Anesthesiology, 79 (1993), pp. 144-163
9
AH Samarkandi
Awake removal of the laryngeal mask airway is safe in paediatric patients
Can J Anaesth, 45 (1998), pp. 150-152
10
WM Splinter, CW Reid
Removal of the laryngeal mask airway in children: deep anesthesia versus awake
J Clin Anesth, 9 (1997), pp. 4-7
11
C Verghese, TG Smith, E Young
Prospective survey of the use of the laryngeal mask airway in 2359 patients
Anaesthesia, 48 (1993), pp. 58-60
12
JR Lee, SD Kim, CS Kim, TG Yoon, HS Kim
Minimum alveolar concentration of sevoflurane for laryngeal mask airway removal in anesthetized children
Anesth Analg, 104 (2007), pp. 528-531
13
JR Lee, YS Lee, CS Kim, SD Kim, HS Kim
A comparison of the end-tidal sevoflurane concentration for removal of the laryngeal mask airway and laryngeal tube in anesthetized children
Anesth Analg, 106 (2008), pp. 1122-1125
14
YH Shim, CS Shin, CH Chang, YS Shin
Optimal end-tidal sevoflurane concentration for the removal of the laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized adults
Anesth Analg, 101 (2005), pp. 1034-1037
15
W Xiao, X Deng
The minimum alveolar concentration of enflurane for laryngeal mask airway extubation in deeply anesthetized children
Anesth Analg, 92 (2001), pp. 72-75
16
JR Brimacombe, AIJ Brain, AM Berry
The Laryngeal Mask Airway Instruction Manual (3rd ed.), Intavent Research Ltd., London (1996)
Article  
17
CP Larson
Airway management
GE Morgan, MS Mikhail, MJ Murray (Eds.), Clinical Anesthesiology (4th ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York (2006), p. 94
18
RG Soto, ES Fu, H Vila Jr, RV Miguel
Capnography accurately detects apnea during monitored anesthesia care
Anesth Analg, 99 (2004), pp. 379-382
19
AR Williams, K Tomlin
The modified bite guard: a method for administering supplemental oxygen and measuring carbon dioxide
Anesthesiology, 90 (1999), pp. 338-339

References

Close