Influencing factors on seal pressure of laryngeal mask

doi:10.16352/j.issn.1001-6325.2025.04.0428

Abstract

Abstract: As an airway management tool, the seal performance of the laryngeal mask is crucial. The seal pressure of the laryngeal mask is a key indicator for evaluating the performance of the laryngeal mask. Appropriate seal pressure is of great clinical significance to ensure effective ventilation and avoid complications. This article reviews the factors that affect the seal pressure of the laryngeal mask, including structural design, material characteristics, inflation volume, insertion skill, airway pressure, and patients' individual characteristics. Understanding and optimizing the above factors can help anesthesiologists to better apply the laryngeal mask in clinical anesthesia, to reduce patient complications, and improve patient safety as well as comfort.

Key words: laryngeal mask airway, seal pressure, influencing factors, airway management

CLC Number:

R614

FU Yunke, ZHANG Changsheng. Influencing factors on seal pressure of laryngeal mask[J]. Basic & Clinical Medicine, 2025, 45(4): 428-433.

References

[1] Wong DT, Ooi A, Singh KP, et al. Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure between the Ambu^® AuraGain^TM and the LMA^® Supreme^TM supraglottic airways: a randomized-controlled trial[J]. Can J Anaesth, 2018, 65:797-805.
[2] Beleña JM, Núñez M, Anta D, et al. Comparison of Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme and Laryngeal Mask Airway Proseal with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomised controlled trial[J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol, 2013, 30:119-123.
[3] Wong DT, Ooi A, Singh KP, et al. Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure between the Ambu^® AuraGain^TM and the LMA^® Supreme^TM supraglottic airways: a randomized-controlled trial[J]. Can J Anaesth, 2018, 6:797-805.
[4] Liew GH, Yu ED, Shah SS, et al. Comparison of the clinical performance of i-gel, LMA Supreme and LMA ProSeal in elective surgery[J]. Singapore Med J, 2016,57:432-437.
[5] Lopez AM, Agusti M, Gambus P, et al. A randomized comparison of the Ambu AuraGain versus the LMA supreme in patients undergoing gynaecologic laparoscopic surgery[J]. J Clin Monit Comput, 2017,31:1255-1262.
[6] Yoo JY, Kwak HJ, Ha EJ, et al. Comparison of McGrath videolaryngoscope-assisted insertion versus standard blind technique for flexible laryngeal mask airway insertion in adults[J]. Singapore Med J, 2022, 63:342-344.
[7] Cattano D, Ferrario L, Maddukuri V, et al. A randomized clinical comparison of the intersurgical i-gel and LMA Unique in non-obese adults during general surgery[J]. Minerva Anestesiol, 2011, 77:292-297.
[8] Uppal V, Fletcher G, Kinsella J. Comparison of the i-gel with the cuffed tracheal tube during pressure-controlled ventilation[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2009,102:264-268.
[9] Tan Y, Jiang J, Wang R. Contrast of oropharyngeal leak pressure and clinical performance of I-gel^TM and LMA ProSeal^TM in patients: a meta-analysis[J]. PLoS One, 2022, 17:e0278871. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278871.
[10] Yan CL, Chen Y, Sun P, et al. Preliminary evaluation of SaCoVLM^TM video laryngeal mask airway in airway management for general anesthesia[J]. BMC Anesthesiol, 2022, 22:3. doi: 10.1186/s12871-021-01541-0.
[11] Sun Y, Zhang M, Gao X, et al. Effect of the new video laryngeal mask airway SaCoVLM on airway management in lateral laparoscopic urological surgery: a single center randomized controlled trial[J]. Sci Rep, 2024,14:2132. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-51856-4.
[12] Seet E, Yousaf F, Gupta S, et al. Use of manometry for laryngeal mask airway reduces postoperative pharyngolaryngeal adverse events: a prospective, randomized trial[J]. Anesthesiology, 2010,112:652-657.
[13] Van Zundert AA, Kumar CM, Van Zundert TC. Malpositioning of supraglottic airway devices: preventive and corrective strategies[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2016,116:579-582.
[14] Kumar CM, Van Zundert TC, Seet E, et al. Time to consider supraglottic airway device oropharyngeal leak pressure measurement more objectively[J]. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand, 2021,65:142-145.
[15] Gong YH, Yi J, Zhang Q, et al. Effect of low dose rocuronium in preventing ventilation leak for flexible laryngeal mask airway during radical mastectomy[J]. Int J Clin Exp Med, 2015,8:13616-13621.
[16] Saraswat V. Effects of anaesthesia techniques and drugs on pulmonary function[J]. Indian J Anaesth, 2015,59:557-564.
[17] Fujiwara A, Komasawa N, Nishihara I, et al. Muscle relaxant effects on insertion efficacy of the laryngeal mask ProSeal^® in anesthetized patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial[J]. J Anesth, 2015,29:580-584.
[18] Natalini G, Facchetti P, Dicembrini MA, et al. Pressure controlled versus volume controlled ventilation with laryngeal mask airway[J]. J Clin Anesth, 2001, 13: 436–439.
[19] Fiedler MO, Schätzle E, Contzen M, et al. Evaluation of different positive end-expiratory pressures using Supreme^TM airway laryngeal mask during minor surgical procedures in Children[J]. Medicina (Kaunas), 2020,56:551. doi: 10.3390/medicina56100551.
[20] Rustagi P, Patkar GA, Ourasang AK, et al. Effect of pneumoperitoneum and lateral position on oropharyngeal seal pressures of Proseal LMA in laparoscopic urological procedures[J]. J Clin Diagn Res, 2017,11:UC05-UC09. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/22168.9422.
[21] KumarA, Sinha C, Kumar N, et al. Comparison of the oropharyngeal leak pressure between three second generation supraglottic airway devices during laparoscopic surgery in pediatric patients[J]. Paediatr Anaesth, 2022,32:843-850. doi: 10.1111/pan.14447.
[22] Lan S, Zhou Y, Li JT, et al. Influence of lateral position and pneumoperitoneum on oropharyngeal leak pressure with two types of laryngeal mask airways[J]. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand,2017, 61:1114-1121.
[23] Mishra SK, Sivaraman B, Balachander H, et al. Effect of pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenberg position on oropharyngeal sealing pressure of I-gel^TM and ProSeal LMA^TM in laparoscopic gynecological surgery: a randomized control-led trial[J]. Anesth Essays Res, 2015,9:353-358.
[24] Mishra SK, Nawaz M, Satyapraksh MV, et al. Influence of head and neck position on oropharyngeal leak pressure and cuff position with the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and the I-gel: a randomized clinical trial[J]. Anesthesiol Res Pract, 2015, 2015:705869. doi: 10.1155/2015/705869.
[25] Ravi R, Mohan VK, Badhe AS, et al. Comparison of weight-based and pinna size-based selection of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in paediatric population-a prospec-tive exploratory trial[J]. Indian J Anaesth, 2019, 63:36-41. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_423_18.
[26] In CB, Cho SA, Lee SJ, et al. Comparison of the clinical performance of airway management with the i-gel^® and laryngeal mask airway Supreme^TM in geriatric patients: a prospective and randomized study[J]. Korean J Anesthesiol, 2019, 72:39-46.
[27] Katsiampoura AD, Killoran PV, Corso RM, et al. Laryngeal mask placement in a teaching institution: analysis of difficult placements[J]. F1000Res, 2015, 4:102. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.6415.1.
[28] Ramachandran SK, Mathis MR, Tremper KK, et al. Predictors and clinical outcomes from failed Laryngeal Mask Airway Unique^TM: a study of 15,795 patients[J]. Anesthesiology, 2012,116:1217-1226.