Airway management by physicians wearing anti-chemical warfare gear: Comparison between laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal intubation

Zeev Goldik, Jacob Bornstein, Arieh Eden, Ron Ben-Abraham

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

32 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background and objective: To evaluate the ease with which successful insertion of a laryngeal mask airway can be performed in comparison with endotracheal intubation by medical personnel wearing chemical protective equipment. Methods: Anaesthetists and non-anaesthetists (each n = 20) participated in the prospective comparative trial in an animal laboratory. The time and success rates of laryngeal mask airway vs. endotracheal tube insertions were measured as performed on anaesthetized monkeys. Results: The results showed that the laryngeal mask airway was inserted more rapidly than the endotracheal tube by both groups (3.6 s and 28.6 s, P< 0.0001). Failed intubation occurred in 35% (anaesthetists) vs. 55% (non-anaesthetists) (P = 0.17). Conclusions: In view of the 100% success rate of insertion even in unfavourable conditions, the possible role of the laryngeal mask airway in the scenario of a toxic mass casualty event should be considered.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)166-169
Number of pages4
JournalEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology
Volume19
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2002
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Intubation, intratracheal, laryngeal mask airway
  • Warfare, chemical

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Airway management by physicians wearing anti-chemical warfare gear: Comparison between laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal intubation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this