Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

When is it Safe to Use a Supraglottic Airway Device? Advanced Uses for SGA Devices

  • Airway Management (LC Berkow, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Anesthesiology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

In recent years, supraglottic airway (SGA) devices have been used extensively intraoperatively and in non-operating room anesthesia (NORA) locations. Their use in laparoscopic surgery, non-supine positions, endoscopy, and bronchoscopy has become common place in anesthesia practices. The purpose of this review is to canvass the recent literature for an evidence-based approach for vetting SGA devices for use in anesthetic procedures traditionally performed with an endotracheal tube (ETT) and in NORA locations.

Recent Findings

We found considerable studies utilizing SGA devices in innovative and non-traditional ways. Recent literature discussed the use of second- and third-generation SGA devices in NORA locations including bronchoscopy and endoscopy suites and in operating rooms for laparoscopic surgeries. Some studies have also used SGA devices in non-supine surgeries which traditionally require ETTs.

Summary

The efficacy and safety of the SGA devices have been vetted in several clinical studies since their inception. This manuscript is focused on the evolution of SGA devices with anesthesia practice to meet the needs of the patient inside and outside the operating room. We hope this article will encourage practitioners to use SGA devices with more ease and comfort in the various, non-conventional clinical settings without compromising patient safety.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Leech BC. The pharyngeal bulb gasway: a new aid in cyclopropane anesthesia. Curr Res Anesth Analg. 1937;16(1):22–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Avery EC. The Leech airway: precursor to the modern supraglottic airway. Can J Anesth. 2018;65(5):586–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-017-1038-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brain AIJ. The laryngeal mask-a new concept in airway management. Br J Anaesth. 1983;55(8):801–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/55.8.801.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brimacombe J. The advantages of the LMA over the tracheal tube or facemask: a meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth. 1995;42(11):1017–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03011075.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. van Esch BF, Stegeman I, Smit AL. Comparison of laryngeal mask airway vs tracheal intubation: a systematic review on airway complications. J Clin Anesth. 2017;36:142–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2016.10.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Selection T. Supraglottic airway devices: their selection, use, and limitations. Published online 2004:9–16.

  7. Miller DM. A proposed classification and scoring system for supraglottic sealing airways: a brief review. Anesth Analg. 2004;99(5):1553–9. https://doi.org/10.1213/01.ANE.0000134798.00069.2B.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Miller DM. Third generation supraglottic airways: Is a new classification needed? Br J Anaesth. 2015;115(4):634–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/BJA/AEV310.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cook TM. Third generation supraglottic airway devices: an undefined concept and misused term. Time for an updated classification of supraglottic airway devices. BJA Br J Anaesth. 2015;115(4):633–634. https://doi.org/10.1093/BJA/AEV309

  10. Cook TM. A further plea for a unified classification of supraglottic (extraglottic) airway devices. BJA Br J Anaesth. 2016;117(1):136. https://doi.org/10.1093/BJA/AEW165.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Van Zundert AAJ, Gatt SP, Van Zundert TCRV, Kumar CM, Pandit JJ. Features of new vision- incorporated third-generation video laryngeal mask airways. J Clin Monit Comput. Published online December 17, 2021:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-021-00780-3. This reference is important because it introduces the concept of a 3rd-generation supraglottic airway device.

  12. Van Zundert AAJ, Kumar CM, Van Zundert TCRV, Gatt SP, Pandit JJ. The case for a 3rd generation supraglottic airway device facilitating direct vision placement. J Clin Monit Comput. 2021;35(2):217–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00537-4. This reference highlights a distinguishing feature of the 3rdrd-generation supraglottic airway device.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Verghese C, Brimacombe JR. Survey of laryngeal mask airway usage in 11,910 patients: safety and efficacy for conventional and nonconventional usage. Anesth Analg. 1996;82(1):129–33. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000539-199601000-00023.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lu PP, Brimacombe J, Yang C, Shyr M. ProSeal versus the classic laryngeal mask airway for positive pressure ventilation during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Anaesth. 2002;88(6):824–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/88.6.824.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Beleña JM. Role of laryngeal mask airway in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;7(11):319. https://doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v7.i11.319.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Subramanian S. Supraglottic devices in laparoscopic surgery - a review of literature. Anesth Clin care. 2016;3(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.24966/acc-8879/100013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Park SK, Ko G, Choi J, Ahn EJ, Kang H. Comparison between supraglottic airway devices and endotracheal tubes in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta- analysis. Published online. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000004598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ye Q, Wu D, Fang W, Wong GTC, Lu Y. Comparison of gastric insufflation using LMA-Supreme and I- gel versus tracheal intubation in laparoscopic gynecological surgery by ultrasound: a randomized observational trial. BMC Anesthesiol. 2020;20(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/S12871-020-01057-Z

  19. Kang SH, Park MH. Comparison of early postoperative recovery between laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal tube in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Aa randomized trial. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98(25):e16022. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000016022. This reference discusses the postop recovery period with the use of supraglottic airway devices and endotracheal intubation.

  20. Liu Y, Song Y, Wang M, et al. LMA® protector™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries: a multicenter prospective observational study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2021;21(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-021-01535-y.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Michael Marsh H. Optimal use of LMA SupremeTM for laparoscopy. J Invest Surg. 2021;34(10):1145–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941939.2020.1767736.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim D, Park S, Kim JM, Choi GS, Kim GS. Second generation laryngeal mask airway during laparoscopic living liver donor hepatectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):3532. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83173-5. This reference discusses the use of second generation laryngeal mask airway in hepatectomy.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Kee WDN. Laryngeal mask airway for radiotherapy in the prone position. Anaesthesia. 1992;47(5):446–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.1992.tb02242.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Whitacre W, Dieckmann L, Austin PN. An update: use of laryngeal mask airway devices in patients in the prone position. AANA J. 2014;82(2):101–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Olsen KS, Petersen JT, Pedersen NA, Rovsing L. Self-positioning followed by induction of anaesthesia and insertion of a laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal intubation and subsequent positioning for spinal surgery in the prone position: a randomised clinical trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2014;31(5):259–65. https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000000004.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sharma B, Sood J, Sehgal R, Sahai C, Gera A. ProSeal laryngeal mask airway TM insertion in the prone position: optimal utilization of operation theatre personnel and time? J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2014;30(2):177–82. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9185.130005.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Alexandra Saraiva MA. Laryngeal mask airway in prone position in ambulatory surgery: a prospective observational study. J Anesth Clin Res. 2015;06(06). https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-6148.1000534

  28. Mahgoub AN. Comparison of the use of laryngeal mask airway supreme and laryngeal mask airway ProSeal in prone position for pilonidal sinus excision surgery. Res Opin Anesth Intensive Care. 2015;2(4):111. https://doi.org/10.4103/2356-9115.178902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hegde HV, Bandi J, Mudakanagoudar MS, Honnannavar KA. Evaluation of performance of Streamlined Liner of the Pharynx Airway™, Laryngeal Mask Airway-ProSeal and endotracheal tube in prone position: a prospective, randomised study. Indian J Anaesth. 2018;62(3):173. https://doi.org/10.4103/IJA.IJA_691_17.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Gouveia B, Ferreira L, Sousa M, Fernandes RC. Airway management in prone position: a case of knife injury in the posterior spine. Oxford Med Case Reports. 2022;2022(8):289–91. https://doi.org/10.1093/OMCR/OMAC067. This reference discusses supraglottic airway placement in prone patients.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Brimacombe J, Keller C. An unusual case of airway rescue in the prone position with the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway [2]. Can J Anesth. 2005;52(8):884. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03021787.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Raphael J, Rosenthal-Ganon T, Gozal Y. Emergency airway management with a laryngeal mask airway in a patient placed in the prone position. J Clin Anesth. 2004;16(7):560–1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2004.03.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. van Dijck M, Houweling BM, Koning MV. Blind intubation through an i-gel® in the prone position: a prospective cohort study. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2020;48(6):439–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057X20954443.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Saracoglu KT, Demir A, Pehlivan G, Saracoglu A, Eti Z. Analysing the efficacy of the I-gel supraglottic airway device in the supine and lateral decubitus positions. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2018;50(4):259–62. https://doi.org/10.5603/AIT.a2018.0028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lim JA, Jeong MY, Kim JH. Airway management using laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in a patient in a lateral decubitus position: a case report. Med (United States). 2019;98(51). https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000018287

  36. Farouk I, Abdelhamid BM, Wishahy MK, Mohamed H, Hassan MM. Efficiency of I-gel supraglottic airway device during mechanical ventilation in supine and lateral decubitus position in obese patient; prospective observational study. Egypt J Anaesth. 2020;36(1):126–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/11101849.2020.1789811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Osborn IP, Cohen J, Soper RJ, Roth LA. Laryngeal mask airway–a novel method of airway protection during ERCP: comparison with endotracheal intubation. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56(1):122–8. https://doi.org/10.1067/MGE.2002.125546.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Gaitini LA, Lavi A, Stermer E, Mora PC, Pott LM, Vaida SJ. Gastro-laryngeal tube for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a preliminary report. Anaesthesia. 2010;65(11):1114–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2010.06510.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Fabbri C, Luigiano C, Cennamo V, et al. The gastro-laryngeal tube for interventional endoscopic biliopancreatic procedures in anesthetized patients. Endoscopy. 2012;44(11):1051–4. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1310159.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Sreevastava DK, Verma RN, Verma R. A randomized controlled trial comparing gastro-laryngeal tube with endotracheal intubation for airway management in patients undergoing ERCP under general anaesthesia. Med J Armed Forces India. 2018;75:146–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2018.01.006.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Middleton C, Terblanche N, Skinner MW. Sa1214 The development of a new airway device specifically designed for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: The LmagastroTM Airway. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85(5):AB203. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIE.2017.03.451

  42. Skinner MW, Galloway PS, McGlone DJ, Middleton C. Use of the LMA® GastroTM Airway, a novel dual channel laryngeal mask airway, for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a report of two cases. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2018;46(6):632. https://aaic.net.au/document/?D=20180302

  43. Terblanche NCS, Middleton C, Choi-Lundberg DL, Skinner M. Efficacy of a new dual channel laryngeal mask airway, the LMA®Gastro™ airway, for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a prospective observational study. Br J Anaesth. 2018;120(2):353–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BJA.2017.11.075.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Brimacombe J, Keller C, Fullekrug B, et al. A multicenter study comparing the ProSeal TMand classic TMLaryngeal MASK AIRWAY IN ANESTHETIZED. NONPARALYZED PATIENTS Anesthesiology. 2002;96(2):289–95. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-200202000-00011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ali A, Canturk S, Turkmen A, Turgut N, Altan A. Comparison of the laryngeal mask airway supreme and laryngeal mask airway classic in adults. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009;26(12):1010–4. https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0B013E3283313FDD.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. McCrirrick A, Ramage DTO, Pracilio JA, Hickman JA. Experience with the laryngeal mask airway in two hundred patients. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1991;19(2):256–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057x9101900220.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Leslie K, Allen ML, Hessian EC, et al. Safety of sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy in a group of university-affiliated hospitals: a prospective cohort study. Br J Anaesth. 2017;118(1):90–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/BJA/AEW393.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Coté GA, Hovis RM, Ansstas MA, et al. Incidence of sedation-related complications with propofol use during advanced endoscopic procedures. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;8(2):137–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2009.07.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. 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(3):573–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000539-199709000-00016.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Dingley J, Whitehead MJ, Wareham K. A comparative study of the incidence of sore throat with the laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia. 1994;49(3):251–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1365-2044.1994.TB03434.X.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Sorbello IZ, Maugeri JESSICAG, Pluchino, Timpanaro, Musarra, Sorbello MASSIMILIANO. LMA- Gastro for endoscopic gastrointestinal procedures (EGIP): a case series. Trends Anaesth Crit Care. 2018;23:13. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TACC.2018.09.014

  52. Hagan KB, Carlson R, Arnold B, et al. Safety of the LMA®Gastro™ for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Anesth Analg. 2020;131(5):1566–72. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000005183. This reference is about the safety of a specifically designed supraglottic airway for endoscopic gastrointestinal procedures.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Hagan K, Carlson R, Arnold B, et al. Is the GastroTM LMA® a feasible alternative to a native airway for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography? Trends Anaesth Crit Care. 2020;30:e86. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TACC.2019.12.214. This reference is about a specifically designed supraglottic airway for endoscopic gastrointestinal procedures.

  54. Schmutz A, Loeffler T, Schmidt A, Goebel U. LMA Gastro™ airway is feasible during upper gastrointestinal interventional endoscopic procedures in high risk patients: a single-center observational study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2020;20(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12871-020-0938-9/FIGURES/5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Tran A, Thiruvenkatarajan V, Wahba M, et al. LMA® GastroTM airway for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a retrospective observational analysis. BMC Anesthesiol. 2020;20(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-020-01019-5

  56. Saxena S, Aminian A, Nahrwold DA, Daper A. LMA gastro airway seen through the eyes of a cardiac anesthesiologist. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2019;33(8):2365–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Suhre WM, Lang JD, Madtes DK, Abdelmalak BB. Partnership with interventional pulmonologist: an anesthesiologist’s perspective. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2019;52(6):1049–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.OTC.2019.08.006. This reference is about the relationship between the anesthesiologist and the interventional pulmonologist as they share the airway.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Birmingham B, Mentzer SJ, Body SC. Laryngeal mask airway for therapeutic fiberoptic bronchoscopic procedures. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 1996;10(4):519–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-0770(05)80017-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Chenna P, Loiselle A, Brown D, Misselhorn D, Chen A. Laryngeal mask airway (LMA) use during EBUS bronchoscopy in an interventional pulmonary (IP) suite: a retrospective look at 200 cases. Chest. 2013;144(4):790A. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.1704500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Fadaizadeh L, Hosseini MS, Dabir S. Role of laryngeal mask airway in interventional bronchoscopy procedures for upper tracheal stenosis: case series. Middle East J Anesthesiol. 2013;22(2):223–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Alon D, Pertzov B, Gershman E, et al. The safety of laryngeal mask airway-assisted bronchoscopy versus standard nasal bronchoscopy. Respiration. 2017;93(4):279–84. https://doi.org/10.1159/000456551.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Piccioni F, Codazzi D, Paleari MC, et al. Endosonographic evaluation of the mediastinum through the i-gel O2 supraglottic airway device. Tumori. 2021;107(1):86–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300891619871104. This reference discusses the use of supraglottic airway for advanced endoscopic procedures.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Galway U, Zura A, Khanna S, Wang M, Turan A, Ruetzler K. Anesthetic considerations for bronchoscopic procedures: a narrative review based on the Cleveland clinic experience. J Thorac Dis. 2019;11(7):3156–70. https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2019.07.29. An excellent overview of anesthetic management for bronchoscopic procedure.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Goel M, Kumar A, Maitra G, et al. Safety and diagnostic yield of transbronchial lung cryobiopsy by flexible bronchoscopy using laryngeal mask airway in diffuse and localized peripheral lung diseases: a single-center retrospective analysis of 326 cases. Lung India. 2021;38(2):109. https://doi.org/10.4103/LUNGINDIA.LUNGINDIA_220_20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Knight M., et al. "P5 Pulmonary aspiration during pregnancy or immediately postpartum in the UK: a two-year National descriptive study. Obstet Anaesth Assoc Manchester 2016;25 (2016): 14.

  66. Kwanten LE, Madhivathanan P. Supraglottic airway devices: current and future uses. Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 2018; 79: 31e5

  67. Kimsella SM, Winton AL, Mushambi MC, et al. Failed tracheal Intubation during obstetrical anesthesia: a literature review. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2015;24:356–74. This reference is a review article that discusses failed intubation in obstetrical anesthesia.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Metodiev Y,Mushabi M, Supraglottic airway devices for Caesarean delivery under general anaesthesia: for all, for none or some ? Br J Anaesth 2020;125 (1): e7ee11 https://doi.org/10.1016/bja.2020.02.012. This reference discusses supraglottic airway devices for Caesarean delivery.

  69. White LD, Thaag C, Hodson A, Melhuish TM, Barron FA. Godsall MG , Comparison of supraglottic airway devices with endotracheal intubation in low-risk devices with endotracheal intubation in low risk patients for cesarean delivery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesth Analg 2020;131(4):1092–1101 https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000004618. This reference is a review article that compares the efficacy of intubation and SGA use in cesarean delivery.

  70. Sherwin M, Katz D,Using Gastric ultrasound to assess gastric content in the pregnant patient, BJA Nov 2021,Vol 21, Issue 11 pp 404- 407, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjae.2021.08.001. This reference discusses the use of gastric ultrasound in assessment of the gravid uterus.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Advanced Airway Fellowship, Department of Anesthesiology, Montefiore Medical Center, NY, New York, USA

    Sneha Bidaye

  2. Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, NY, USA

    Aleah Sommerville

  3. Department of Anesthesiology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

    Tracey Straker

  4. Department of Anesthesia, Silver Zone 4th floor, 110 East 210th Street, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA

    Tracey Straker

Authors
  1. Sneha Bidaye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aleah Sommerville
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tracey Straker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tracey Straker.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Sneha Bidaye, Aleah Sommerville, and Tracey Straker declare they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the author.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Search Strategy

We used PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science as our primary sources for literature review. The personal experiences of our senior author have been instrumental in assessing the literature and the safety and efficacy of the SGA devices in varied clinical settings.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Airway Management

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bidaye, S., Sommerville, A. & Straker, T. When is it Safe to Use a Supraglottic Airway Device? Advanced Uses for SGA Devices. Curr Anesthesiol Rep 13, 13–21 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40140-023-00548-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40140-023-00548-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation