Comparison of fibreoptic-guided orotracheal intubation through classic and single-use laryngeal mask airways.

We compared times to intubate the trachea orally and success rates using two fibreoptically assisted techniques in 42 healthy patients with normal airways using (a) a 6.0-mm nasal RAE tracheal tube passed through a classic laryngeal mask airway (CLMA group) or (b) a 6.0-mm nasal RAE tracheal tube passed through a new disposable Portex Soft Seal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA group). The mean (SD) total intubation times were 82 (14) and 80 (17) s, respectively (p = 0.55). The success rates for intubation at the first attempt were similar (17/21 in the CLMA vs. 16/21 in the PLMA group; p = 0.50). We conclude that there is no clinically significant difference between the times to intubate the trachea or success rates using these two devices, but there may be other more subtle measures which might influence the choice of device in clinical practice. Finally, in the course of this study we developed a grading scale to describe the laryngeal views obtained when using a fibrescope passed through supraglottic airway devices

The case for a 3rd generation supraglottic airway device facilitating direct vision placement

Although 1st and 2nd generation supraglottic airway devices (SADs) have many desirable features, they are nevertheless inserted in a similar ‘blind’ way as their 1st generation predecessors. Clinicians mostly still rely entirely on subjective indirect assessments to estimate correct placement which supposedly ensures a tight seal. Malpositioning and potential airway compromise occurs in more than half of placements. Vision-guided insertion can improve placement. In this article we propose the development of a 3rd generation supraglottic airway device, equipped with cameras and fiberoptic illumination, to visualise insertion of the device, enable immediate manoeuvres to optimise SAD position, verify whether correct 1st and 2nd seals are achieved and check whether size selected is appropriate. We do not provide technical details of such a ‘3rd generation’ device, but rather present a theoretical analysis of its desirable properties, which are essential to overcome the remaining limitations of current 1st and 2nd generation devices. We also recommend that this further milestone improvement, i.e. ability to place the SAD accurately under direct vision, be eligible for the moniker ‘3rd generation’. Blind insertion of SADs should become the exception and we anticipate, as in other domains such as central venous cannulation and nerve block insertions, vision-guided placement becoming the gold standard