Laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal intubation as general anesthesia airway managements for atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: a comparative analysis based on propensity score matching.

BACKGROUND

The current evidence on the use of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) as an airway management technique for general anesthesia (GA) during atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation (CA) is insufficient. This study aims to compare the feasibility, safety, and clinical benefits of LMA and endotracheal intubation (ETI) for airway management in AF CA.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-two consecutive patients with AF who underwent CA under GA were included and divided into two groups based on different airway management methods (66 in the LMA group, 86 in the ETI group). After propensity score matching, a final analysis cohort of 132 patients was obtained to compare procedural parameters, adverse events, and prognosis between the two groups.

RESULTS

The LMA group exhibited significantly shorter total procedural time (p = 0.039), anesthesia induction time (p = 0.015), and recovery time (p = 0.006) compared to the ETI group. The mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate were significantly lower in the LMA group during extubation and 1-min post-extubation (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the LMA group demonstrated lower MAP levels during intubation (p = 0.029). The incidences of intraoperative hypotension (p = 0.017) and bradycardia (p = 0.032) were significantly lower in the LMA group. The incidences of delayed recovery or delirium (p = 0.027), laryngeal or airway injury (p = 0.016), cough or bucking (p = 0.001), and sore throat (p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the LMA group. There were no statistically significant differences in catheter stability parameters and sinus rhythm maintenance rates between the two groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

LMA is feasible, safe, and effective in AF CA as an optimized airway management technique for GA.