open access

Vol 2, No 2 (2017)
REVIEW ARTICLE
Published online: 2017-05-24
Get Citation

Supraglottic devices — future or everyday life?

Maciej Sip, Agata Dabrowska, Karina Prucnal, Mateusz Puslecki, Tomasz Klosiewicz
DOI: 10.5603/DEMJ.2017.0015
·
Disaster Emerg Med J 2017;2(2):74-83.

open access

Vol 2, No 2 (2017)
REVIEW ARTICLE
Published online: 2017-05-24

Abstract

The most common cause of upper respiratory tract obstruction in an unconscious or unresponsive patient is the loss of muscle tone in the upper airway. Consequently, this leads to a reduction in the tone of the epiglottis, collapse of the tongue and closure of the airway at the level of the pharynx, preventing respiration. Diagnosing airway obstruction is associated with the implementation of urgent procedures aimed at restor­ing and maintaining patency. Among the techniques of restoring airway patency anatomically, we prefer extending the head and pushing the posterior mandible forward. Airway ventilation is not always possible through the use of non-surgical methods. Ventilating patients with obstructed airways using a self-inflating bag can prove to be very difficult. In such situations, it is necessary to use airway adjuncts. The purpose, regardless of the circumstances, is to remove anatomical barriers, prevent gastric aspiration and to facilitate proper lung ventilation. Endotracheal intubation is the gold standard for instrumentally maintaining a secure airway. The procedure, however, is reserved for experienced personnel because of how difficult it is to perform and the many complications that arise with it. In situations where difficulty is encountered, an alternative device to secure airway patency is needed.

Abstract

The most common cause of upper respiratory tract obstruction in an unconscious or unresponsive patient is the loss of muscle tone in the upper airway. Consequently, this leads to a reduction in the tone of the epiglottis, collapse of the tongue and closure of the airway at the level of the pharynx, preventing respiration. Diagnosing airway obstruction is associated with the implementation of urgent procedures aimed at restor­ing and maintaining patency. Among the techniques of restoring airway patency anatomically, we prefer extending the head and pushing the posterior mandible forward. Airway ventilation is not always possible through the use of non-surgical methods. Ventilating patients with obstructed airways using a self-inflating bag can prove to be very difficult. In such situations, it is necessary to use airway adjuncts. The purpose, regardless of the circumstances, is to remove anatomical barriers, prevent gastric aspiration and to facilitate proper lung ventilation. Endotracheal intubation is the gold standard for instrumentally maintaining a secure airway. The procedure, however, is reserved for experienced personnel because of how difficult it is to perform and the many complications that arise with it. In situations where difficulty is encountered, an alternative device to secure airway patency is needed.

Get Citation

Keywords

endotracheal intubation, alternative airway devices, SAD, supraglottic devices, LMA, LTD, I-gel

About this article
Title

Supraglottic devices — future or everyday life?

Journal

Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal

Issue

Vol 2, No 2 (2017)

Pages

74-83

Published online

2017-05-24

DOI

10.5603/DEMJ.2017.0015

Bibliographic record

Disaster Emerg Med J 2017;2(2):74-83.

Keywords

endotracheal intubation
alternative airway devices
SAD
supraglottic devices
LMA
LTD
I-gel

Authors

Maciej Sip
Agata Dabrowska
Karina Prucnal
Mateusz Puslecki
Tomasz Klosiewicz

References (41)
  1. Kluj P, Dąbrowski M, Dąbrowska A, et al. Specyfika udzielania pomocy medycznej poszkodowanemu w warunkach bojowych w środowisku taktycznym w oparciu o standard TCCC Część III. Przywrócenie drożności dróg oddechowych i wydolnego oddechu podczas wykonywania zabiegów ratowniczych w środowisku taktycznym w oparciu o standard TCCC. Anestezjologia i Ratownictwo. 2013; 7: 456–469.
  2. Soar J, Nolan JP, Böttiger BW, et al. Adult advanced life support section Collaborators. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2015: Section 3. Adult advanced life support. Resuscitation. 2015; 95: 100–147.
  3. Deakin CD, Nolan JP, Soar J, et al. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2010 Section 4. Adult advanced life support. Resuscitation. 2010; 81(10): 1305–1352.
  4. Guła P, Machała W. Postępowanie przedszpitalne w obrażeniach ciała. Wydawnictwo lekarskie PZWL, Warszawa 2016.
  5. Nakayama DK, Gardner MJ, Rowe MI. Emergency endotracheal intubation in pediatric trauma. Ann Surg. 1990; 211(2): 218–223.
  6. Campbell JE. International Trauma Life Support. Ratownictwo przedszpitalne w urazach. Medycyna Praktyczna, Kraków 2015.
  7. Nolan JP, Soar J, Zidman DA et al. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation. Section 1. E. 2010.
  8. Katzenell U, Lipsky AM, Abramovich A, et al. Prehospital intubation success rates among Israel Defense Forces providers: epidemiologic analysis and effect on doctrine. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013; 75(2 Suppl 2): S178–S183.
  9. Garza AG, Gratton MC, Coontz D, et al. Effect of paramedic experience on orotracheal intubation success rates. J Emerg Med. 2003; 25(3): 251–256.
  10. Wang HE, Simeone SJ, Weaver MD, et al. Interruptions in cardiopulmonary resuscitation from paramedic endotracheal intubation. Ann Emerg Med. 2009; 54(5): 645–652.e1.
  11. Jones JH, Murphy MP, Dickson RL, et al. Emergency physician-verified out-of-hospital intubation: miss rates by paramedics. Acad Emerg Med. 2004; 11(6): 707–709.
  12. Nolan JP, Soar J. Airway techniques and ventilation strategies. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2008; 14(3): 279–286.
  13. Sierpina DI, Chaudhary H, Walner DL, et al. Laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal tube in pediatric adenotonsillectomy. Laryngoscope. 2012; 122(2): 429–435.
  14. Alexander R, Hodgson P, Lomax D, et al. A comparison of the laryngeal mask airway and Guedel airway, bag and facemask for manual ventilation following formal training. Anaesthesia. 1993; 48(3): 231–234.
  15. Deakin CD, Peters R, Tomlinson P, et al. Securing the prehospital airway: a comparison of laryngeal mask insertion and endotracheal intubation by UK paramedics. Emerg Med J. 2005; 22(1): 64–67.
  16. Brimacombe J. Laryngeal Mask Anesthesia. Principles and Practice. Saunders Elsevier Ltd, London 2005.
  17. Ocker H, Wenzel V, Schmucker P, et al. A comparison of the laryngeal tube with the laryngeal mask airway during routine surgical procedures. Anesth Analg. 2002; 95(4): 1094–7, table of contents.
  18. Cook TM, Gatward JJ, Handel J, et al. Evaluation of the LMA Supreme in 100 non-paralysed patients. Anaesthesia. 2009; 64(5): 555–562.
  19. Zundert AV, Brimacombe J. The LMA SupremeTM- a pilot study. Anaesthesia. 2008; 63(2): 202–213.
  20. Wharton NM, Gibbison B, Gabbott DA, et al. I-gel insertion by novices in manikins and patients. Anaesthesia. 2008; 63(9): 991–995.
  21. Abukawa Y, Hiroki K, Ozaki M. Initial experience of the i-gel supraglottic airway by the residents in pediatric patients. J Anesth. 2012; 26(3): 357–361.
  22. Kette F, Reffo I, Giordani G, et al. The use of laryngeal tube by nurses in out-of-hospital emergencies: preliminary experience. Resuscitation. 2005; 66(1): 21–25.
  23. Wiese CHR, Semmel T, Müller 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(2): 194–198.
  24. Mahajan R, Charak DS, Bassi R, et al. Trachlight-guided intubation with esophageal combitube in situ. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2012; 28(4): 544–545.
  25. Calkins MD, Robinson TD. Combat trauma airway management: endotracheal intubation versus laryngeal mask airway versus combitube use by Navy SEAL and Reconnaissance combat corpsmen. J Trauma. 1999; 46(5): 927–932.
  26. Polat R, Aydin GB, Ergil J, et al. Comparison of the i-gel™ and the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic™ in terms of clinical performance. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2015; 65(5): 343–348.
  27. Arı DE, Ar AY, Karip CŞ, et al. Comparison of I-gel with Classic Laryngeal Mask Airway Regarding the Ease of Use and Clinical Performance. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2015; 43(5): 299–303.
  28. Länkimäki S, Alahuhta S, Silfvast T, et al. Feasibility of LMA Supreme for airway management in unconscious patients by ALS paramedics. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2015; 23: 24.
  29. Chloros T, Xanthos T, Iacovidou N, et al. Supreme Laryngeal Mask Airway achieves faster insertion times than Classic LMA during chest compressions in manikins. Am J Emerg Med. 2014; 32(2): 156–159.
  30. Ratajczyk P, Małachowska B, Gaszyńska E, et al. A randomised comparison between Cobra PLA and classic laryngeal mask airway and laryngeal tube during mechanical ventilation for general anaesthesia. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2013; 45(1): 20–24.
  31. An J, Nam SB, Lee JS, et al. Comparison of the i-gel and other supraglottic airways in adult manikin studies: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017; 96(1): e5801.
  32. Kuwahara Y, Taguchi S, Kusunoki S, et al. Use of i-gel supraglottic airway for emergency airway management by novice personnel in comparison with laryngeal mask airway and tracheal intubation in manikin models. Masui. 2013; 62(5): 592–595.
  33. Jänig C, Wenzel J, König J, et al. Airway management techniques in a restricted-access situation: a manikin study. Eur J Emerg Med. 2016; 23(4): 286–291.
  34. Kette F, Reffo I, Giordani G, et al. The use of laryngeal tube by nurses in out-of-hospital emergencies: preliminary experience. Resuscitation. 2005; 66(1): 21–25.
  35. Lefrançois DP, Dufour DG. Use of the esophageal tracheal combitube by basic emergency medical technicians. Resuscitation. 2002; 52(1): 77–83.
  36. Piegeler T, Roessler B, Goliasch G, et al. Evaluation of six different airway devices regarding regurgitation and pulmonary aspiration during cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) - A human cadaver pilot study. Resuscitation. 2016; 102: 70–74.
  37. Pietrzyk M, Grześkiewicz M, Gaszyński W, et al. Porównanie urządzeń nadkrtaniowych do udrażniania dróg oddechowych pod względem zabezpieczenia przed zachłyśnięciem treścią żołądkową – badanie manekinowi. Anestezjologia i Ratownictwo. 2011; 5: 436–441.
  38. Jarineshin H, Kashani S, Vatankhah M, et al. Better Hemodynamic Profile of Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion Compared to Laryngoscopy and Tracheal Intubation. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2015; 17(8): e28615.
  39. 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: 142–150.
  40. Kömür E, Bakan N, Tomruk ŞG, et al. Comparison of the Supraglottic Airway Devices Classic, Fastrach and Supreme Laryngeal Mask Airway: A Prospective Randomised Clinical Trial of Efficacy, Safety and Complications. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2015; 43(6): 406–411.
  41. Szarpak Ł, Kurowski A, Osłowski R, et al. Alternatywne metody udrażniania dróg oddechowych u dzieci. Nowa Pediatria. 2014; 3: 92–96.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl