Department of Anaesthesia, Galway University Hospitals and National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Anaesthesia. 2013 Oct;68(10):1026-32. doi: 10.1111/anae.12356. Epub 2013 Jul 16.
We compared the Baska(®) mask with the single-use classic laryngeal mask airway (cLMA) in 150 females at low risk for difficult tracheal intubation in a randomised, controlled clinical trial. We found that median (IQR [range]) seal pressure was significantly higher with the Baska mask compared with the cLMA (40 (34-40 [16-40]) vs 22 (18-25 [14-40]) cmH2O, respectively, p < 0.001), indicating a better seal. In contrast, the first time success rate for insertion of the Baska mask was lower than that seen with the cLMA (52/71 (73%) vs 77/99 (98%), respectively, p < 0.001). There were no differences in overall device insertion success rates (78/79 (99%) vs 68/71 (96%), respectively, p = 0.54). The Baska mask proved more difficult to insert, requiring more insertion attempts, taking longer to insert and had higher median (IQR [range]) insertion difficulty scores (1.6 (0.8-2.2 [0.1-5.6]) vs 0.5 (0.3-1.4 [0.1-4.0]), respectively, p < 0.001). There was also an increased rate of minor blood staining of the Baska mask after removal, but there were no differences in other complication rates, such as laryngospasm, or in the severity of throat discomfort. In conclusion, in clinical situations where the seal with the glottic aperture takes priority over ease of insertion, the Baska mask may provide a useful alternative to the cLMA.
我们在一项随机对照临床试验中比较了 150 名低插管难度风险女性的 Baska（®）面罩与单次使用经典喉罩气道（cLMA）。我们发现，与 cLMA 相比，Baska 面罩的中位（IQR [范围]）密封压力显著更高（分别为 40（34-40 [16-40]）与 22（18-25 [14-40]）cmH2O，p < 0.001），表明密封更好。相比之下，Baska 面罩的首次插入成功率低于 cLMA（分别为 52/71（73%）与 77/99（98%），p < 0.001）。总体装置插入成功率无差异（分别为 78/79（99%）与 68/71（96%），p = 0.54）。Baska 面罩更难插入，需要更多的插入尝试，插入时间更长，插入难度评分的中位数（IQR [范围]）更高（分别为 1.6（0.8-2.2 [0.1-5.6]）与 0.5（0.3-1.4 [0.1-4.0]），p < 0.001）。Baska 面罩移除后也有更高的轻微血迹染色率，但其他并发症发生率（如喉痉挛）或咽喉不适的严重程度无差异。总之，在密封声门裂比插入容易更重要的临床情况下，Baska 面罩可能是 cLMA 的有用替代。
