This Article Résumé de cet Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a scholarly reply Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Preis, C. Articles by Zimpfer, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Preis, C. Articles by Zimpfer, M. Related Collections Cardiothoracic Anesthesia, Respiration and Airway

Variations in ILMA external diameters: another cause of device failure

Carsten Preis, MD^*, Christian Czerny, MD, Irene Preis, MD and Michael Zimpfer, MD^*

^* From the Departments of Anesthesiology and General Intensive Care,
Osteology/Radiology, University of Vienna, Austria and
the Department of Anesthesiology, University of Würzburg, Germany.

Address correspondence to: Carsten Preis MD, Department of Anesthesiology and General Intensive Care, University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Phone: +43-1-40 400-4102; Fax: +43-1-40 400-4104; E-mail address: carsten.preis{at}univie.ac.at

Purpose: To report failure of insertion of #5 and #4 intubating laryngeal mask airways (ILMAs) in a patient with a mouth opening of just under 25 mm, and the variances among same-size ILMAs.

Clinical features: A 53-yr-old man with obstructive sleep apnea underwent elective ENT surgical repair. His mouth opening was just under 25 mm. Ventilation by mask was easy. Direct laryngoscopy failed after induction of anesthesia and neuromuscular block. Neither a #5 nor a #4 ILMA could be passed between the patient's teeth, despite different twisting maneuvres. A #4 LMA was thus prepared as a conduit for fibreoptic intubation. Placement of the LMA was easy, as was fibreoptic-guided intubation. The LMA was removed over the tracheal tube (TT) to enable ENT surgery, and the further course was uneventful. Manual examination showed that, unlike others of the same type, the failed ILMAs were not sufficiently compressible either to allow insertion in this patient or to the 20 mm reported as the maximal outer dimension of the device. Radiological examination revealed that, at the point of the device where it is intended to be compressible, the silicone layer was thicker in the failed devices than in stock compressible ILMAs, and the end of the steel tube was not so sharply beveled.

Conclusion: Our inability to insert an ILMA in a patient with an interdental distance of just under 25 mm was because the device was not sufficiently compressible although the manufacturer states the maximal outer dimension to be 20 mm.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. M. Goutcher and V. Lochhead Reduction in mouth opening with semi-rigid cervical collars Br. J. Anaesth., September 1, 2005; 95(3): 344 - 348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. M. Goutcher, V. Lochhead, R. Komatsu, D. I. Sessler, and M. Ozaki ILMA in cervical spine immobilization Br. J. Anaesth., April 1, 2005; 94(4): 544 - 545. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Preis and I. Preis Removal of the connector on the laryngeal mask airway provides a useful alternative to the intubating laryngeal mask : [Le retrait du connecteur du masque larynge permet une utilisation equivalente au masque larynge d'intubation] Can J Anesth, June 1, 2001; 48(6): 600 - 603. [Abstract] [Full Text]