Bahar KUVAKİ, Semih KÜÇÜKGÜÇLÜ, Şule ÖZBİLGİN, Melek AKSOY SARI, Meltem GENEZ, Tangül BEYDEŞ

A comparison of usage of the laryngeal mask UniqueTM in denticulate and edentulate geriatric patients

Background/aim: Mask ventilation in geriatric and edentulous patients can be ineffective or even impossible because of the shape inside the patients cheeks. For patients for whom a mask cannot be used for long, the use of a laryngeal mask can ease the administration of anesthesia. The aim of this study was to compare the use of the laryngeal mask UniqueTM in denticulate and edentulate patients aged over 65 years. Materials and methods: This prospective study included patients according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists I III classification, aged 65 years or more. The patients were divided into two groups: a dentulous group (n = 33) and an edentulous group (n = 33). The success of the first attempt of insertion, ease of insertion, time taken to insert, and oropharyngeal leak pressure were measured. After insertion of the laryngeal mask UniqueTM, a researcher who was unaware of whether the patients had teeth or not conducted an oropharyngeal leak test. Results: The success rate of inserting the laryngeal mask UniqueTM on the first attempt was higher in the dentulous group than in the edentulous group. Ease of insertion, time taken to insert, oropharyngeal leak pressure, and laryngopharyngeal morbidity were similar for each group. Conclusion: In this study, successful insertion of the laryngeal mask UniqueTM was higher in dentulous than in edentulous patients. We conclude that this effect could have important implications for anesthesiologists managing edentulous geriatric patients with supraglottic airway devices.

PDF

___

1. Butterworth JF, Mackey DC, Wasnick JD. Geriatric anesthesia. In: Morgan & Mikhails Clinical Anesthesiology. 5th ed. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill; 2013. pp. 907-917.
2. Racine SX, Solis A, Hamou NA, Letoumelin P, Hepner DL, Beloucif S, Baillard C. Face mask ventilation in edentulous patients: a comparison of mandibular groove and lower lip placement. Anesthesiology 2010; 112: 1190-1193.
3. Jones JR. Laryngeal mask airway: an alternative for the difficult airway. AANA J 1995; 63: 444-449.
4. Brimacombe J. Analysis of 1500 laryngeal mask uses by an anaesthetist in adult undergoing routine anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1996; 51: 76-80.
5. Verghese C, Berlet J, Kapilaand R, Pollard A. Clinical assessment of the single use laryngeal mask airway--the LMAunique. Br J Anaesth 1998; 80: 677-679.
6. Brimacombe J, Keller C, Morris R. A comparison of the disposable versus the reusable laryngeal mask airway in paralyzed adult patients. Anesth Analg 1998; 87: 921-924.
7. Ryu J, Oh AY, Baek JS, Kim JH, Park SH, Noh JM. Remifentanil dose for laryngeal mask airway insertion with a single standard dose of propofol during emergency airway management in elderly patients. Korean J Anesthesiol 2014; 66: 278-282.
8. Ezri T, Ady N, Szmuk P, Glanz L, Shklar B, Katz J, Geva D. Use of cuffed oropharyngeal vs laryngeal mask airway in elderly patients. Can J Anaesth 1999; 46: 363-367.
9. Aviv JE. Effects of aging on sensitivity of the pharyngeal and supraglottic areas. Am J Med 1994; 103: 74-76.
10. Dundee JW, Robinson FP, McCollum JS, Patterson CC. Sensitivity to propofol in the elderly. Anaesthesia 1986; 41: 482-485.
11. Francksen H, Renner J, Hanss R, Scholz J, Doerges V, Bein B. A comparison of the i-gel with the LMA Unique in nonparalysed anaesthetised adult patients. Anaesthesia 2009; 64: 1118-1124.
12. López AM, Valero R, Bovaira P, Pons M, Sala-Blanch X, Anglada T. A clinical evaluation of four disposable laryngeal masks in adult patients. J Clin Anesth 2008; 20: 514-520.
13. Voyagis GS, Batzioulis PG, Secha-Doussaitau PN. Selection of the proper size of laryngeal mask airway in adults. Anesth Analg 1996; 83: 658-667.
14. Uppal V, Gangaiah S, Fletcher G, Kinsella J. Randomized crossover comparison between the i-gel and the LMA Unique in anesthetised, paralyzed adults. Br J Anaesth 2009; 103: 882- 885.
15. Verghese C, Berlet J, Kapilaand R, Pollard A. Clinical assessment of the single use laryngeal mask airwaythe LMAUnique. Br J Anaesth 1998; 80: 677-679.
16. Conlon NP, Sullivan R. The effect of leaving dentures in place on bag-mask ventilation at induction of general anesthesia. Anesth Analg 2007; 105: 370-373.
17. Eskidemir G, Küçükgüçlü S, Özbilgin Ş, Günenç F, Maltepe F. Investigating the frequency and causes of difficult mask ventilation in intraoperative in geriatric patients. Turk J Geriatr 2015;18: 238-245.
18. Kubota Y, Toyoda Y, Kubota H. Face mask fitting for edentulous patients. Anesth Analg 1993; 76: 450.
19. Nandi PR, Charlesworth CH, Taylor SJ, Nunn JF, Doré CJ. Effect of general anaesthesia on the pharynx. Br J Anaesth 1991; 66: 157-162.
20. Khan ZH, Mofrad MK, Arbabi S, Javid MJ, Makarem J. Upper lip bite test as a predictor of difficult mask ventilation: a prospective study. Middle East J Anesthesiol 2009; 20: 377-382.
21. Beydeş T, Küçükgüçlü S, Özbilgin Ş, Kuvaki B, Ademoğlu M, Sarı M. Comparison of laryngeal mask airway SupremeTM versus UniqueTM in edentulous geriatric patients. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim 2016; 44: 32-36.
22. Francksen H, Bein B, Cavus E, Renner J, Scholz J, Steinfath M, Tonner PH, Doerges V. Comparison of LMA Unique, Ambu laryngeal mask and Soft Seal laryngeal mask during routine surgical procedures. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2007; 24: 134-140.
23. Brimacombe J, Berry A. Neuromuscular blockade and insertion of the laryngeal mask airway. Br J Anaesth 1993; 71: 166-167.
24. Paech MJ, Tweedie O, Stannard K, Hepp M, Dodd P, Daly H, Bennett EJ, Millard A, Doherty DA. Randomised, crossover comparison of the single-use SoftSeal and the LMA Unique laryngeal mask airways. Anaesthesia 2005; 60: 354-359.
25. Brimacombe J, von Goedecke A, Keller C, Brimacombe M. The laryngeal mask airway Unique versus the Soft Seal laryngeal mask: a randomized, crossover study in paralyzed, anesthetized patients. Anesth Analg 2004; 99: 1560-1563.
26. Tan MG, Chin ER, Kong CS, Chan YH, Ip-Yam PC. Comparison of the re-usable LMA Classic and two single-use laryngeal masks (LMA Unique and SoftSeal) in airway management by novice personnel. Anaesth Intensive Care 2005; 33: 739-743.
27. Yurtlu BS, Hanci V, Köksal B, Okyay D, Ayoğlu H, Özkoçak Turan I. Impact of the practising anesthesiologist team member on the laryngeal mask cuff pressures and adverse event rate. Rev Bras Anestesiol 2014; 1-6.
28. Walls RM, Murphy MF. The geriatric patient. In: Walls RM, Murphy MF, editors. Manual of Emergency Airway Management. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2004. pp. 393-395.
29. Van Zundert A, Al-Shaikh B, Brimacombe J. Comparison of three disposable extraglottic airway devices in spontaneously breathing adults: the LMA-Unique, the Soft Seal laryngeal mask, and the Cobra perilaryngeal airway. Anesthesiology 2006; 104: 1165-1169.
30. Cook TM, Trümpelmann P, Beringer R, Stedeford J. A randomised comparison of the Portex Softseal laryngeal mask airway with the LMA-Unique during anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 2005; 60: 1218-1225.
31. Jaffe RA, Brock-Utne JG. A modification of the Yodfat laryngeal mask airway insertion technique. J Clin Anesth 2002; 14: 462- 463.
32. Asai T, Morris S. The laryngeal mask airway: its features, effects and role. Can J Anaesth 1994; 41: 930-960.
33. Günenç F, Küçükgüçlü S, Özbilgin Ş, Kuvaki B, Maltepe F. Effect of laryngeal mask cuff pressure on postoperative pharyngolaryngeal morbidity in geriatric patients. Turk J Geriatr 2015; 18: 143-150.