Ist die Kehlkopfmaske ein minimal invasives Instrument zur Sicherung der Atemwege? Ergänzende Bemerkungen zum Beitrag „Schäden und Gefahren durch Einsatz der Kehlkopfmaske” von V. Hempel Anaesthesist (1999) 48:399–402

Abstract

Minor laryngopharyngeal complaints following anaesthesia considerably determine postoperative patient comfort. They cannot be eliminated but reduced by experience and careful preparation and insertion technique. The incidence of minor laryngopharyngeal symptoms following the use of the laryngeal mask airway is similar to that following endotracheal intubation. However, there seems to be a distinct pattern of complaints: discomfort with swallowing is more frequent after LMA, whereas dysphonia is more often observed following endotracheal intubation. The significance of LMA cuff pressures in the pathogenesis of postoperative throat complaints remains unclear. There is sound evidence that cuff pressure is not a representative measure for the effective pressure load upon the pharyngeal mucosa. Measurement of cuff pressure is not obligatory, instead reduction of cuff volume to a "just seal" situation seems to be a reasonable approach. The laryngeal mask airway has definitely changed anaesthesiology airway management. Whether this is due to its supposedly less invasiveness compared to endotracheal intubation has not been proven by scientific investigations.