Comparison of Laryngeal Mask Supreme® and Soft Seal® for airway management in several positions
- 110 Downloads
In emergency situations, rescuers occasionally must secure the airway while the patient is in a position other than the ideal supine position. We hypothesized that the laryngeal mask airway Supreme® (Supreme) may be useful for emergent airway management in several positions and compared the utility of the Supreme with that of the conventional Soft Seal® (Soft Seal) device.
Nineteen novice doctors in our anesthesia department attempted insertion of the Supreme or Soft Seal device on a simulated manikin in the supine, left lateral decubitus (left-LT), right lateral decubitus (right-LT), prone, and sitting positions. For each device, successful ventilation attempts, mean time to secure the airway, and difficulty of use [using the visual analog scale (VAS)] were evaluated.
The success rate of ventilation was significantly higher with the Supreme than the Soft Seal in the prone and sitting positions (P < 0.05). Compared with the Soft Seal, time to secure the airway was significantly shorter with the Supreme when the manikin was in the sitting position but not in the other four positions. VAS scores for Supreme use were significantly higher than those for Soft Seal use in the right-LT, prone, and sitting positions.
Airway management attempts by novice doctors were more successful with the Supreme than the Soft Seal in the right-LT, prone, and sitting positions in the manikin. The Supreme may therefore be useful for emergent airway management.
KeywordsLaryngeal Mask Supreme® Laryngeal Mask Soft Seal® Airway management Manikin Body position
Conflict of interest
The authors have no affiliation with the manufacturer of any device described in the manuscript and declare no financial interest in relation to the material described in the manuscript. Financial support for the study was provided by our institution and department.
- 4.Field JM, Hazinski MF, Sayre MR, Chameides L, Schexnayder SM, Hemphill R, Samson RA, Kattwinkel J, Berg RA, Bhanji F, Cave DM, Jauch EC, Kudenchuk PJ, Neumar RW, Peberdy MA, Perlman JM, Sinz E, Travers AH, Berg MD, Billi JE, Eigel B, Hickey RW, Kleinman ME, Link MS, Morrison LJ, O’Connor RE, Shuster M, Callaway CW, Cucchiara B, Ferguson JD, Rea TD, Vanden Hoek TL. Part 1: executive summary. 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation. 2010;122:S640–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Neumar RW, Otto CW, Link MS, Kronick SL, Shuster M, Callaway CW, Kudenchuk PJ, Ornato JP, McNally B, Silvers SM, Passman RS, White RD, Hess EP, Tang W, Davis D, Sinz E, Morrison LJ. Part 8: Adult advanced cardiovascular life support. 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation. 2010;122:S729–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Eschertzhuber S, Brimacombe J, Hohlrieder M, Keller C. The laryngeal mask airway Supreme: a single use laryngeal mask airway with an oesophageal vent. A randomised, cross-over study with the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal in paralysed, anaesthetised patients. Anaesthesia. 2009;64:79–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway. An updated report. Anesthesiology. 2003;98:1269–77.Google Scholar