Acta Anaesthesiol Taiwan 2009;47(2):84−86
©2009 Taiwan Society of Anesthesiologists
T E C H N I C A L C O M M U N I C AT I O N
Removal of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) can be executed while patients are deeply anesthetized or awake. Recent publications have focused on suitable anesthetic concentrations in the brain for removal of LMA in anesthetized patients. Here, we describe an easy and safe method for removal of LMA during deep anesthesia.
Safe and Easy Emergence from Anesthesia in Adults
Following Removal of Laryngeal Mask Airway:
Utility of Oral Airway and T-connector
Ming-Hui Hsieh
1, Jin-Te Ho
2, Chin-Min Huang
3, Meei-Shyuan Lee
4,
Ta-Liang Chen
1,5, Chih-Shung Wong
6, Jui-An Lin
1,7*
1Department of Anesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 2Division of Anesthesiology, Armed Forces Hualien General Hospital, Hualien, Taiwan, R.O.C. 3Division of Nursing, Armed Forces Hualien General Hospital, Hualien, Taiwan, R.O.C. 4School of Public Health, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 5College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
6Department of Anesthesiology, Tri-Service General Hospital and National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
7Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Received: Apr 17, 2008 Revised: Nov 11, 2008 Accepted: Nov 14, 2008 KEY WORDS: anesthesia recovery period, emergence; laryngeal masks
* Corresponding author. Department of Anesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, 252, Wuxing Street, Xinyi District, Taipei 110, Taiwan, R.O.C.
E-mail: juian.lin@gmail.com
The timing of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) removal after surgery is controversial.1−11 A greater incidence
of airway hyperreactivity and complications have been reported by some studies3,6,7 when the LMA is
removed in the awake state as opposed to the an-esthetized state. Recent publications12−15 on LMA
removal in a deeply anesthetized state reported the end-tidal concentration of inhalational anesthetics (ETIA) necessary to achieve successful LMA removal in 50% (ED50) and 95% (ED95) of patients. In these studies, which had similar design, after completion
of surgery, the oropharynx was gently cleared with suction before the depth of anesthesia was changed, and then the ETIA was adjusted to the predeter-mined level and maintained for at least 10 minutes to allow the concentration between the alveoli and brain to come to an equilibrium. Their meth-ods, while able to provide an adequate brain con-centration for LMA removal during deep anesthesia, might not be practical. Under clinical conditions, it is not usual to intentionally fix the ETIA for “at least” 10 minutes before LMA removal. In addition,
Safe and easy emergence from anesthesia following LMA removal 85 the suggested ED95 for LMA removal applies to only
95% of patients, and jaw lift as well as mask venti-lation for 5−10 minutes were also required.12,14,15
With institutional review board approval, upon the completion of minor plastic (debridement, skin graft) or urologic (cystoscopy, ureteroscopy) surgery (< 3 hours) under isoflurane anesthesia, we remove the LMA in deeply anesthetized adults following gentle suction of the oropharynx with the depth of anesthesia unchanged. The LMA is removed while still inflated to facilitate a more complete removal of salivary secretions.16 Following LMA removal, we
routinely place an oral airway to keep the airway patent and check if ventilation is adequate accord-ing to three principles: observation (synchronized chest wall movement); audition (clear and loud breath sounds); and feel (feeling a hit of warm air-flow during expiration). We do not use nasal airways for fear of epistaxis. Although nasal airways are usu-ally better tolerated by patients than are oral air-ways when in light plane of anesthesia,17 placement
of oral airways would not cause any obvious airway problems during emergence from isoflurane an-esthesia if it is placed in deep plane of anan-esthesia. In addition, capnography and ETIA obtained by gas-sampling via a T-connector provide more informa-tion about airway patency and residual inhalainforma-tional anesthetics. By using our method, jaw lift and
assisted mask ventilation are usually not necessary; instead, a mask is placed over the patient’s mouth and nose to supply O2 and we just simply wait for the patient’s recovery. Time to obey the order “open your eyes” following LMA removal is 20−30 minutes. As the LMA is removed when the patient is in surgi-cal plane of anesthesia, there should be no cough-ing, movements or any other airway complications requiring management.
Apnea or airway obstruction as indicated by a decline on pulse oximetry may be detected only be-latedly if there is visible chest wall movement. Capnography accurately detects apnea or airway obstruction, which can improve patient safety dur-ing light anesthesia.18 It is better to obtain
real-time ETIA data to know the patient’s status and how long it will take for the patient to awaken. Therefore, it is also necessary to monitor end-tidal gas concen-tration during the process of emergence. Modified bite guard has been reported to be helpful for mea-suring ETIA,19 but it might not be suitable for LMA
removal in deep planes of anesthesia because the air passage is often blocked by the base of the tongue in deeply anesthetized patients.
During operation, a T-connector with tubing (Figure 1A, left white arrow) serves as an extension of the gas-sampling line (Figure 1A, right white arrow), with the Luer Lock connectors being linked
A B
D E
C
Figure 1 (A) The T-connector as an extension of the gas-sampling line during surgery. (B) Gas sampling through nasal
route with an adequate Berman airway placed following removal of laryngeal mask airway. (C) Gas sampling through oral route with an adequate Berman airway placed following removal of laryngeal mask airway. (D) Capnography obtained by gas sampling through nasal route. (E) Capnography obtained by gas sampling through oral route.
86 M.H. Hsieh et al well together (Figure 1A, white oval). After LMA
re-moval, the rectangular end of the T-connector can be used to facilitate gas sampling and monitor the recovery state of patients during emergence. At first, we tried to link a T-connector to the end-tidal gas sampling line and put the rectangular end of the T-connector near the nostrils to obtain the gas data (Figure 1B). However, this method failed in almost every case (Figure 1D) with an oral airway placed in the oropharynx. The reason for failure could be related to the natural rules of fluid dynamics, which states that a fluid (can be liquid or gas) tends to flow through the route of least resistant to avoid external tension. In anesthetized patients with spontaneous breathing, loss of upper airway muscle tone allows the tongue base (sometimes even epiglottis) to fall back against the posterior pharyngeal wall. If we introduce an oral airway to solve the problem, the major gas outlet will become the mouth instead of the nostrils owing to the smaller and more resistive nasal passage. Thus, we then placed the rectangu-lar end of the T-connector in the lateral channel of the oral airway (Figure 1C) and temporarily fixed the end to the lateral channel with tape. The waveform obtained with this method (Figure 1E) was almost identical to that obtained during LMA anesthesia. As we just put the rectangular end of the T-connector into the lateral channel (Figure 1C, white arrow) and not into the mouth, there is low possibility of occlusion of the sample line by secretions.
A point that needs to be stressed is that this method should only be performed in anesthetized adults with spontaneous ventilation. It is not suit-able for patients with impaired ventilatory drive (e.g. curarization) because an oral airway can only provide upper airway patency.
This method was employed in over 300 ASA class I−II adults, and all recovered from anesthesia smoothly without any obvious complication. Most could obey the instruction to open their mouth for removal of the oral airway. If time permits, this safe and easy method of early LMA removal can be applied selec-tively in deeply anesthetized adult patients.
References
1. Baird MB, Mayor AH, Goodwin AP. Removal of the laryngeal mask airway: factors affecting the incidence of post-operative adverse respiratory events in 300 patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1999;16:251−6.
2. Dolling S, Anders NR, Rolfe SE. A comparison of deep vs. awake removal of the laryngeal mask airway in paediatric dental daycase surgery. A randomised controlled trial.
Anaesthesia 2003;58:1224−8.
3. Gataure PS, Latto IP, Rust S. Complications associated with removal of the laryngeal mask airway: a comparison of removal in deeply anaesthetised versus awake patients.
Can J Anaesth 1995;42:1113−6.
4. Mason DG, Bingham RM. The laryngeal mask airway in chil-dren. Anaesthesia 1990;45:760−3.
5. Nunez J, Hughes J, Wareham K, Asai T. Timing of removal of the laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia 1998;53: 126−30.
6. O’Neill B, Templeton JJ, Caramico L, Schreiner MS. The laryn-geal mask airway in pediatric patients: factors affecting ease of use during insertion and emergence. Anesth Analg 1994;78: 659−62.
7. Pappas AL, Sukhani R, Lurie J, Pawlowski J, Sawicki K, Corsino A. Severity of airway hyperreactivity associated with laryn-geal mask airway removal: correlation with volatile anes-thetic choice and depth of anesthesia. J Clin Anesth 2001;13: 498−503.
8. Pennant JH, White PF. The laryngeal mask airway. Its uses in anesthesiology. Anesthesiology 1993;79:144−63. 9. Samarkandi AH. Awake removal of the laryngeal mask
air-way is safe in paediatric patients. Can J Anaesth 1998;45: 150−2.
10. Splinter WM, Reid CW. Removal of the laryngeal mask airway in children: deep anesthesia versus awake. J Clin Anesth 1997;9:4−7.
11. Verghese C, Smith TG, Young E. Prospective survey of the use of the laryngeal mask airway in 2359 patients. Anaesthesia 1993;48:58−60.
12. Lee JR, Kim SD, Kim CS, Yoon TG, Kim HS. Minimum alveo-lar concentration of sevoflurane for alveo-laryngeal mask airway removal in anesthetized children. Anesth Analg 2007;104: 528−31.
13. Lee JR, Lee YS, Kim CS, Kim SD, Kim HS. A comparison of the end-tidal sevoflurane concentration for removal of the laryn-geal mask airway and larynlaryn-geal tube in anesthetized children.
Anesth Analg 2008;106:1122−5.
14. Shim YH, Shin CS, Chang CH, Shin YS. Optimal end-tidal sevoflurane concentration for the removal of the laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized adults. Anesth Analg 2005;101: 1034−7.
15. Xiao W, Deng X. The minimum alveolar concentration of enflurane for laryngeal mask airway extubation in deeply anesthetized children. Anesth Analg 2001;92:72−5. 16. Brimacombe JR, Brain AIJ, Berry AM. The Laryngeal Mask
Airway Instruction Manual, 3rd ed. London: Intavent Research
Ltd., 1996.
17. Larson CP. Airway management. In: Morgan GE, Mikhail MS, Murray MJ, eds. Clinical Anesthesiology, 4th ed. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 2006:94.
18. Soto RG, Fu ES, Vila H Jr, Miguel RV. Capnography accurately detects apnea during monitored anesthesia care. Anesth
Analg 2004;99:379−82.
19. Williams AR, Tomlin K. The modified bite guard: a method for administering supplemental oxygen and measuring car-bon dioxide. Anesthesiology 1999;90:338−9.
