Supraglottic airway devices: more good than bad

Article information

Korean J Anesthesiol. 2019;72(6):525-526

Publication date (electronic) : 2019 November 29

doi : https://doi.org/10.4097/kja.19417

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Corresponding author: Hee-Pyoung Park, M.D., Ph.D. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 03080, Korea Tel: +82-2-2072-2466, Fax: +82-2-747-5639 Email: hppark@snu.ac.kr

Received 2019 October 22; Accepted 2019 October 22.

Supraglottic airway devices (SADs) are tools designed to maintain an open upper airway. Since the classic laryngeal mask airway was introduced in the early 1980s by Dr. Brain, numerous upgraded and improved second-generation SADs, which incorporate specific features to improve the positive pressure ventilation and reduce the risk of aspiration, have been used in clinical practice. Thus, SADs have resulted in a paradigm shift in airway management in patients undergoing surgical procedures under general anesthesia.

SADs are an effective alternative to tracheal intubation for routine general anesthesia. They have advantages over tracheal intubation, namely, they present stable hemodynamics and decreased airway morbidity [1]. Currently, as numerous SADs differing in geometry (body shape, flexibility, presence or absence of an inflatable cuff, automatic control of cuff inflation pressure during positive pressure ventilation) have been used in clinical practice, many clinical studies comparing their clinical performances have been performed. A prospective randomized study conducted by Choi et al. [2], which was published in the latest issue of the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology (KJA), compared the clinical performances of the Baska Mask^Ⓡ and i-gel^Ⓡ in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. There were no significant differences in respiratory or hemodynamic parameters, insertion-related characteristics, or postoperative airway-related complications between them, except for a higher oropharyngeal leak pressure in the Baska Mask^Ⓡ.

SADs can be used to aid blind or fiberoptic bronchoscope-guided intubation [3–5]. Particularly, in cases of failed direct laryngoscopy or failed intubation, blind or fiberoptic bronchoscope-guided insertion of a tracheal tube through the SAD is used to achieve formal tracheal intubation. In addition, the use of SADs can increase patient safety by providing continuous ventilation during airway management in patients with difficult laryngoscopy or intubation. A case series and narrative review article, which was published in the latest issue of the KJA, demonstrated successful fiberoptic bronchoscope-guided intubation via an Ambu Auragain^TM SAD in awake patients with anticipated difficult airway [6].

SADs can be used for airway rescue in difficult airway situations, such as “cannot intubate, cannot ventilate.” They can rescue emergent situations when traditional attempts to ventilate or oxygenate the patient fail. Both the difficult airway algorithm by the American Society of Anesthesiologists and Difficult Airway Society 2015 guidelines suggest the use of SADs for airway rescue in such scenarios [7,8]. In addition, SADs can be used for advance airway management in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, although their functional outcome was not favorable 30 days after the out-of-hospital cardiac arrest compared to tracheal intubation [9].

Although SADs are used for airway management, there are some concerns [1,10]. Ventilatory failure due to failed placement is a complication associated with their use, although the failure rate is low. Postoperative airway-related complications, such as sore throat and tongue injury, can occur in patients managed with SADs. Pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents can also occur during positive pressure ventilation using SADs, although the incidence is low.

In conclusion, recent advances in SAD design have enabled the popular use of SAD in patients undergoing surgeries under general anesthesia. Particularly, SAD is a useful tool for difficult airway management. However, while using SADs, attention should be paid to some complications, such as ventilatory failure, airway injury, and pulmonary aspiration.

Notes

Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

References

1. Ramachandran SK, Kumar AM. Supraglottic airway devices. Respir Care 2014;59:920–31.

2. Choi SR, Lee TY, Kim SW, Park SY, Chung CJ, Kim J. Comparison of clinical performance of i-gel^Ⓡ and Baska Mask^Ⓡ during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Korean J Anesthesiol 2019;72:576–82.

3. Kleine-Brueggeney M, Theiler L, Urwyler N, Vogt A, Greif R. Randomized trial comparing the i-gel^TM and Magill tracheal tube with the single-use ILMATM and ILMATM tracheal tube for fibreoptic-guided intubation in anaesthetized patients with a predicted difficult airway. Br J Anaesth 2011;107:251–7.

4. Theiler L, Kleine-Brueggeney M, Urwyler N, Graf T, Luyet C, Greif R. Randomized clinical trial of the i-gel^TM and Magill tracheal tube or single-use ILMATM and ILMATM tracheal tube for blind intubation in anaesthetized patients with a predicted difficult airway. Br J Anaesth 2011;107:243–50.

5. Mendonca C, Tourville CC, Jefferson H, Nowicka A, Patteril M, Athanassoglou V. Fibreoptic-guided tracheal intubation through i-gel^Ⓡ and LMA^Ⓡ ProtectorTM supraglottic airway devices - a randomised comparison. Anaesthesia 2019;74:203–10.

6. Lim WY, Wong P. Awake supraglottic airway guided flexible bronchoscopic intubation in patients with anticipated difficult airways: a case series and narrative review. Korean J Anesthesiol 2019;72:548–57.

7. Frerk C, Mitchell VS, McNarry AF, Mendonca C, Bhagrath R, Patel A, et al. Difficult Airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults. Br J Anaesth 2015;115:827–48.

8. Apfelbaum JL, Hagberg CA, Caplan RA, Blitt CD, Connis RT, Nickinovich DG, et al. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Anesthesiology 2013;118:251–70.

9. Benger JR, Kirby K, Black S, Brett SJ, Clout M, Lazaroo MJ, et al. Effect of a strategy of a supraglottic airway device vs tracheal intubation during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest on functional outcome: The AIRWAYS-2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2018;320:779–91.

10. Kwanten LE, Madhivathanan P. Supraglottic airway devices: current and future uses. Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 2018;79:31–5.

Article information Continued

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.