Share this article on:

Comparison of laryngeal tube with laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized and paralysed patients

Yildiz, T. S.*; Solak, M.*; Toker, K.*

European Journal of Anaesthesiology (EJA): July 2007 - Volume 24 - Issue 7 - p 620-625
doi: 10.1017/S0265021507000105
Original Article

Background and objective: The laryngeal mask has become a widely accepted alternative to endotracheal intubation and mask ventilation. The laryngeal tube is a relatively new supraglottic airway device for airway management. We compared the new version of the laryngeal tube with the laryngeal mask.

Methods: In a randomized design, either a laryngeal tube (n = 66) or a laryngeal mask (n = 66) were inserted. Ease of insertion, oxygenation and ventilation, spirometry data and postoperative airway morbidity were determined.

Results: After successful insertion, it was possible to maintain oxygenation and ventilation in all the patients. Insertion success rates after the first, second and third attempts were 84.8% (n = 56), 12.1% (n = 8) and 3% (n = 2) for the laryngeal tube compared with 56.1% (n = 37), 25.8% (n = 17) and 18.2% (n = 12) for the laryngeal mask (P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in peak airway pressure, and dynamic compliance between the groups (P > 0.05). Blood on the cuff after removal of the device was noted in one patient with the laryngeal tube and in 10 patients with the laryngeal mask. Six patients in the laryngeal mask group complained of hoarseness (P = 0.012).

Conclusion: With respect to clinical function, the new version of the laryngeal tube and the laryngeal mask are similar and either device can be used to establish a safe and effective airway in paralysed patients.

*University of Kocaeli, School of Medicine, Department of Anaesthesiology, Kocaeli, Turkey

Correspondence to: Tulay Sahin Yildiz, Department of Anaesthesiology, School of Medicine, University of Kocaeli, Derince 41900, Kocaeli, Turkey. E-mails:,; Tel: +90 262 2260573/+90 262 3039499; Fax: +90 262 3257363

Accepted for publication 15 December 2006

© 2007 European Society of Anaesthesiology