Laryngeal mask airway insertion requires less propofol than endotracheal intubation in dogs

Wiederstein, Iris; Auer, Ulrike; Moens, Yves

doi:10.1111/j.1467-2995.2005.00254.x

Cited by 29 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A lower dose of induction agent for the insertion of an LM than for an ETT has been shown in other species such as dogs (Wiederstein et al. ) and humans (Brain ; Blake et al. ; Wilkins et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical evaluation of the v-gel supraglottic airway device in comparison with a classical laryngeal mask and endotracheal intubation in cats during spontaneous and controlled mechanical ventilation

Prasse

Schrack

Wenger

et al. 2016

Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…In the first part of this study, this analysis was based on data from a previous study performed in dogs (Wiederstein et al. ), which compared propofol requirements for placement of the LM and ETT. In the second part, this analysis was based on assumed pressure settings at which all cats in the three groups would show leakage of 20% of TV.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical evaluation of the v-gel supraglottic airway device in comparison with a classical laryngeal mask and endotracheal intubation in cats during spontaneous and controlled mechanical ventilation

Prasse

Schrack

Wenger

et al. 2016

Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This difference is likely to be due to tracheal intubation requiring a greater dose of induction agent than the application of a supraglottic device (Wiederstein et al. ). In regards to the sparing on propofol dose when ketofol is used, Phillips et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of propofol with ketofol, a propofol-ketamine admixture, for induction of anaesthesia in healthy dogs

Martínez-Taboada

Leece

2014

Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Supraglottic airway devices (SGADs) designed for humans have been successfully used during general anesthesia in rabbits and dogs and have the following advantages over orotracheal intubation with an endotracheal tube (ETT): rapid insertion by experienced and inexperienced operators alike, with a reduced anesthetic induction agent requirement, and reduced risk of airway trauma and cardiovascular stimulation during insertion (7, 8, 12, 14–16). However, lingual cyanosis, gastric tympany, and an incomplete airway seal have been reported with the use of human SGAD in rabbits (8, 12, 17).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of a Supraglottic Airway Device (v-gel®) with Blind Orotracheal Intubation in Rabbits

Engbers

Larkin

Rousset³

et al. 2017

Front. Vet. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionAchieving a secure airway in rabbits is generally considered more difficult than in cats or dogs. Their relatively large tongue, small oropharyngeal cavity and glottis limit direct visualization. A rabbit-specific supraglottic airway device (SGAD) may offer benefits over blind orotracheal intubation.Animals and methodsFifteen adult New Zealand white rabbits were randomized to SGAD or orotracheal intubation (ETT). All animals were sedated with dexmedetomidine (0.1 mg kg−1 IM) and midazolam (0.5 mg kg−1 IM), followed by induction with alfaxalone (0.3 mg kg−1 IV). Two CT scans of the head and neck were performed, following sedation and SGAD/ETT placement. The following were recorded: time to successful device insertion, smallest cross-sectional airway area, airway sealing pressure, and histological score of tracheal tissue. Data were analyzed with a Mann–Whitney test.ResultsTwo rabbits were excluded following failed ETT. Body masses were similar [ETT; n = 6, 2.6 (2.3–4.5) kg, SGAD; n = 7, 2.7 (2.4–5.0) kg]. SGAD placement was significantly faster [33 (14–38) s] than ETT [59 (29–171) s]. Cross-sectional area (CSA) was significantly reduced from baseline [12.2 (6.9–3.4) mm2] but similar between groups [SGAD; 2.7 (2.0–12.3) mm2, ETT; 3.8 (2.3–6.6) mm2]. In the SGAD group, the device tip migrated into the laryngeal vestibule in 6/7 rabbits, reducing the CSA. ETT airway seals were higher [15 (10–20) cmH2O], but not significant [SGAD; 5 (5–20) cmH2O, p = 0.06]. ETT resulted in significantly more mucosal damage [histological score 3.3 (1.0–5.0)], SGAD; 0.67 (0.33–3.67).ConclusionThe SGAD studied was faster to place and caused less damage than orotracheal intubation, but resulted in a similar CSA.

show abstract

Laryngeal mask airway insertion requires less propofol than endotracheal intubation in dogs

Cited by 29 publications

References 34 publications

Clinical evaluation of the v-gel supraglottic airway device in comparison with a classical laryngeal mask and endotracheal intubation in cats during spontaneous and controlled mechanical ventilation

Clinical evaluation of the v-gel supraglottic airway device in comparison with a classical laryngeal mask and endotracheal intubation in cats during spontaneous and controlled mechanical ventilation

Comparison of propofol with ketofol, a propofol-ketamine admixture, for induction of anaesthesia in healthy dogs

Comparison of a Supraglottic Airway Device (v-gel®) with Blind Orotracheal Intubation in Rabbits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About