Advanced Search

Home > Journals > Minerva Anestesiologica > Past Issues > Minerva Anestesiologica 2003 June;69(6) > Minerva Anestesiologica 2003 June;69(6):517-25

ISSUES AND ARTICLES   MOST READ   eTOC

CURRENT ISSUEMINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA

A Journal on Anesthesiology, Resuscitation, Analgesia and Intensive Care

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Anesthesiology, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care
Indexed/Abstracted in: Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,036

Frequency: Monthly

ISSN 0375-9393

Online ISSN 1827-1596

 

Minerva Anestesiologica 2003 June;69(6):517-25

ANESTHESIOLOGY 

    ORIGINAL ARTICLES

A prospective, observational evaluation of a new supraglottic airway: the PAXpressTM

Mondello E. 1, Casati A. 2 on behalf of the Italian PAXpress™ Group

1 Department of Anesthesiological SciencesUniversity of Messina, Messina, Italy
2 Department of Anesthesiology IRCCS H San Raffaele Vita-Salute University of Milan, Milan, Italy

Aim. Little infor­ma­tion is avail­able on effi­ca­cy and safe­ty of the new supra­glot­tic ­device, PAXpressTM, in anes­the­tized ­patients. The aim of ­this pros­pec­tive obser­va­tion­al ­study was to eval­u­ate the use of ­this new supra­glot­tic ­device in clin­i­cal prac­tice.
Methods. Ninety-one ­patients (­mean age: 45±11 ­years) under­go­ing extrem­ity or ­minor ­peri-­phery pro­ce­dures (­mean dura­tion 53±18 min), ­with a supra­glot­tic air­way ­were pros­pec­tive­ly stud­ied in 10 hos­pi­tals, ­using a sim­ple ques­tion­naire ­with ­data con­cern­ing anthro­po­met­ric var­i­ables, sur­gi­cal pro­ce­dure, and occur­rence of unto­ward ­events dur­ing PAXpressTM place­ment, anes­the­sia main­te­nance, or post­op­er­a­tive peri­od.
Results. First ­attempt place­ment was ­achieved in 74 ­patients (82.2%), ­while 9 ­patients (10%) ­required 2 ­attempts, and 7 ­patients (7.7%) ­required ­more ­than 2 ­attempts. In ­only 2 ­patients (2%) air­way con­trol was not ­achieved ­with the stud­ied ­device. The ­mean ­time ­required to ­achieve suc­cess­ful place­ment was 49±18 s (­range 4-300 s). Mechanical ven­ti­la­tion was effec­tive­ly main­tained in all stud­ied ­patients, and no ­severe ­adverse ­events ­were report­ed dur­ing the pro­ce­dure. Blood on the ­device was ­observed in 54% of cas­es, and ­this was asso­ciat­ed ­with an inci­dence of ­sore ­throat of 26% in the recov­ery ­area and 13% ­after 6 ­hours ­from the end of sur­gery.
Conclusion. Although fur­ther com­par­a­tive, ran­dom­ized stud­ies ­should be advo­cat­ed to bet­ter eval­u­ate the use of ­this new supra­glot­tic ­device, ­this pros­pec­tive, obser­va­tion­al ­study dem­on­strat­ed ­that PAXpressTM pro­vides ­safe and effec­tive air­way con­trol dur­ing mechan­i­cal ven­ti­la­tion in up to 98% of cas­es.

language: English, Italian


FULL TEXT  REPRINTS

top of page