Positive pressure ventilation during fibreoptic intubation: comparison of the laryngeal mask airway, intubating laryngeal mask and endoscopy mask techniques

Background The efficacy of delivery of mechanical ventilation through different airway devices during fibreoptic intubation is not known. Methods We compared the laryngeal mask airway (LMA † ), intubating laryngeal mask (ILM) and endoscopy mask for positive pressure ventilation (PPV) during fibreoptic intubation. In 80 adult paralysed patients, fibreoptic intubation was performed during PPV using a combination of a size 3 or 4 LMA with a 6.0 mm nasal RAE tracheal tube (LMA3/4 group; n =22), a size 5 LMA with a 7.0 mm nasal RAE tube (LMA5 group; n =18), an ILM with an 8.0 mm special reinforced tracheal tube (ILM group; n =20) or an endoscopy mask (Patil mask) with a 7.5 mm standard tracheal tube (Patil group; n =20). The inspiratory and expiratory tidal volumes ( V i and V e ) with a ventilation pressure of 20 cm H 2 O were measured using a pneumotachograph. Results Mean V e values during fibreoptic intubation in the LMA5 [5.3 ( sd 1.5) ml kg −1 ] and ILM [7.1 (2.3) ml kg −1 ] groups were greater than in the LMA3/4 group [2.6 (1.0) ml kg −1 , P V e was greater in the Patil group [20.6 (4.9) ml kg −1 ] than in the other three groups ( P P Conclusions PPV is possible with the LMA, ILM or endoscopy mask during fibreoptic intubation. With an airway pressure of 20 cm H 2 O, ventilation during intubation using a size 3 or 4 LMA was almost insufficient, while ventilation using a size 5 LMA or an ILM was almost acceptable. Ventilation during intubation with the endoscopy mask was greater than that with the LMA or ILM, but gastric insufflation was more frequent.