A randomized study to compare ProSeal laryngeal mask airway with classic laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized patients

BackgroundTo overcome the problem of gastric content regurgitation, a device with drain tube and better airway sealing has been made: the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA). We aimed to compare the clinical performance of the classic LMA with the PLMA. Several studies comparing these two devices have been done.Our study was designed to compare ease of insertion, airway sealing pressure, and fiber-optic assessment of positioning in adult patients, and we hopes to prove that PLMA is better to LMA in all these aspects. We hypothesized that PLMA would have a better leak pressure than the CLMA and minimum difference in leak pressure of 20% between them was considered clinically significant.Material and methodsOne hundred adult patients of either sex between age group of 18–65 years scheduled for elective surgery were included in the study. Patients were randomly allocated to two groups of 50 patients each. In group I CLMA and in group II PLMA were used. The number of attempts, ease of insertion, time of insertion, and failure if occurred were noted down. Hemodynamic changes, airway sealing pressure, and the fiber-optic were also recorded.ResultsData thus compiled showed that insertion was successful in first attempt in 94% cases with LMA as well as PLMA. The time taken for successful placement of LMA and - PLMA was 15 and 17 s, respectively. Sealing pressure was higher for group II at all cuff volumes. More number of patients (89%) in group II had a fiber optic score of I and II as compared to group I which had 81% patients with score I and II.ConclusionWe conclude that PLMA is easy to insert with a short insertion time, high success of placement at first attempt, and capable of achieving a more effective seal than LMA.