Introduction to Oropharyngeal Leak

What is/are Oropharyngeal Leak?

Oropharyngeal Leak - As secondary outcome measures, oropharyngeal leakage pressure (OLP), ease of gastric tube insertion the insertion time, position and subjective assessments were evaluated. ^[1] We also analyzed insertion parameters, fiberoptic bronchoscopic view, oropharyngeal leak pressure, and peri-operative adverse effects. ^[2] We compared the Baska MaskⓇ with i-gelⓇ by measuring the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and hemodynamic and respiratory parameters during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. ^[3] The primary outcome is the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) at a fixed gas flow of 3 L/min. ^[4] We compared the time for successful insertion on a first attempt as a primary outcome, and the secondary outcomes were success rate, ease of insertion, maneuver for successful ventilation, oropharyngeal leak pressure, gastric insufflation, fiberoptic view grades, ventilator problems, and adverse events. ^[5] The oropharyngeal leak pressures were also noted. ^[6] After insertion of the laryngeal mask airway AuraFlex, oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) was measured at intracuff pressures of 10, 30, and 60-cmH2O according to one of six sequences produced on the basis of 3 × 6 Williams crossover design. ^[7] There were no differences in oropharyngeal leak pressure. ^[8] OBJECTIVE To confirm our hypothesis that the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) of the AuraGain would be noninferior to that of the i-gel in paediatric patients. ^[9] We evaluated the LMA® ProtectorTM in 280 ASA physical status 1–3 patients aged 18–75 years by assessing the ease of insertion, insertion time, oropharyngeal leak pressure, ease of gastric tube passage and complications. ^[10] The operation situation, insertion of laryngeal mask, oropharyngeal leakage pressure(OLP), airway peak pressure(Ppeak), difference value of exhaled tidal volume(∆VT) and adverse reactions of the child patients from three groups were compared. ^[11] It was previously reported that oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) of i-gel™ improved over time after insertion in adults. ^[12] Insertion time, ease of insertion, oropharyngeal leak pressure, and Brimacombe and Berry Bronchoscopy Scores were evaluated. ^[13] Results: The primary outcome measure, the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), was significantly higher for i-gel as compared to LMA Supreme (mean [standard deviation] 26. ^[14] The primary outcome was oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP). ^[15] Ventilation parameters (airway peak pressure, mean airway pressure, end-tidal carbon dioxide, total volume, oropharyngeal leak pressure) and perioperative laryngopharyngeal morbidity were recorded before peritoneal insufflation, during and after the peroperative period. ^[16] The oropharyngeal leak pressure was measured and compared between the Supreme and Air-Q, a typical non-inflatable cuff device. ^[17] The insertion time, number of trials, number of manipulations required, and oropharyngeal leak pressure were also evaluated. ^[18] Clinical characteristics such as oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and ventilation peak pressure are important factors for successful use of supraglottic airway devices in general anaesthesia. ^[19] Following digital insertion of PLMA or I-gel, the following parameters were compared: insertion time, ease of insertion, number of attempts, failed insertion, airway reaction during insertion, oropharyngeal leak (OPL) pressure, and gastric insufflation on auscultation. ^[20] The maximum inner diameter of the cuffed tracheal tube that could be inserted, the fibre-optic view score and the oropharyngeal leak pressure were also evaluated. ^[21] Recently, it has been suggested that the accuracy of LMA placement can be determined by clinical signs such as oropharyngeal leak pressure (OPLP). ^[22] This prospective, randomized controlled study compared the efficacy of airway seal by measuring the oropharyngeal leak pressure in 100 surgical patients who underwent a variety of non-thoracic surgery under general anaesthesia, suitable with a supraglottic airway device. ^[23] The oropharyngeal leak pressure was the primary outcome measure. ^[24]

peak inspiratory pressure

METHODS Oropharyngeal leak pressure, expiratory tidal volume, peak inspiratory pressure, ventilation score, and fiberoptic view score through the AuraGain™ were measured in the neutral, flexed, and extended neck positions as well as the right rotated head and neck position in each patient in a random order. ^[1] The number of insertion attempts, insertion time, oropharyngeal leak pressure, leak volume, fiberoptic bronchoscopic view, peak inspiratory pressure, ease of gastric tube placement, hemodynamic changes, visible blood on PLMA and postoperative airway morbidity were recorded. ^[2] STUDY OBJECTIVE To review all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on supraglottic airway devices (SADs) used in laparoscopy and compare their oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) before and after pneumoperitoneum, and success rate of gastric tube insertion rate. ^[3]

Higher Oropharyngeal Leak

There were no significant differences in respiratory or hemodynamic parameters, insertion-related characteristics, or postoperative airway-related complications between them, except for a higher oropharyngeal leak pressure in the Baska Mask. ^[1] Cobra-PLA offered significantly higher oropharyngeal leak pressure than LMA-Classic [mean difference (MD) = 3. ^[2]

oropharyngeal leak pressure

We also analyzed insertion parameters, fiberoptic bronchoscopic view, oropharyngeal leak pressure, and peri-operative adverse effects. ^[1] We compared the Baska MaskⓇ with i-gelⓇ by measuring the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and hemodynamic and respiratory parameters during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. ^[2] The primary outcome is the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) at a fixed gas flow of 3 L/min. ^[3] We compared the time for successful insertion on a first attempt as a primary outcome, and the secondary outcomes were success rate, ease of insertion, maneuver for successful ventilation, oropharyngeal leak pressure, gastric insufflation, fiberoptic view grades, ventilator problems, and adverse events. ^[4] The oropharyngeal leak pressures were also noted. ^[5] After insertion of the laryngeal mask airway AuraFlex, oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) was measured at intracuff pressures of 10, 30, and 60-cmH2O according to one of six sequences produced on the basis of 3 × 6 Williams crossover design. ^[6] There were no significant differences in respiratory or hemodynamic parameters, insertion-related characteristics, or postoperative airway-related complications between them, except for a higher oropharyngeal leak pressure in the Baska Mask. ^[7] METHODS Oropharyngeal leak pressure, expiratory tidal volume, peak inspiratory pressure, ventilation score, and fiberoptic view score through the AuraGain™ were measured in the neutral, flexed, and extended neck positions as well as the right rotated head and neck position in each patient in a random order. ^[8] There were no differences in oropharyngeal leak pressure. ^[9] OBJECTIVE To confirm our hypothesis that the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) of the AuraGain would be noninferior to that of the i-gel in paediatric patients. ^[10] We evaluated the LMA® ProtectorTM in 280 ASA physical status 1–3 patients aged 18–75 years by assessing the ease of insertion, insertion time, oropharyngeal leak pressure, ease of gastric tube passage and complications. ^[11] It was previously reported that oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) of i-gel™ improved over time after insertion in adults. ^[12] Insertion time, ease of insertion, oropharyngeal leak pressure, and Brimacombe and Berry Bronchoscopy Scores were evaluated. ^[13] Results: The primary outcome measure, the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), was significantly higher for i-gel as compared to LMA Supreme (mean [standard deviation] 26. ^[14] The primary outcome was oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP). ^[15] Cobra-PLA offered significantly higher oropharyngeal leak pressure than LMA-Classic [mean difference (MD) = 3. ^[16] The number of insertion attempts, insertion time, oropharyngeal leak pressure, leak volume, fiberoptic bronchoscopic view, peak inspiratory pressure, ease of gastric tube placement, hemodynamic changes, visible blood on PLMA and postoperative airway morbidity were recorded. ^[17] STUDY OBJECTIVE To review all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on supraglottic airway devices (SADs) used in laparoscopy and compare their oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) before and after pneumoperitoneum, and success rate of gastric tube insertion rate. ^[18] Ventilation parameters (airway peak pressure, mean airway pressure, end-tidal carbon dioxide, total volume, oropharyngeal leak pressure) and perioperative laryngopharyngeal morbidity were recorded before peritoneal insufflation, during and after the peroperative period. ^[19] The oropharyngeal leak pressure was measured and compared between the Supreme and Air-Q, a typical non-inflatable cuff device. ^[20] The insertion time, number of trials, number of manipulations required, and oropharyngeal leak pressure were also evaluated. ^[21] Clinical characteristics such as oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and ventilation peak pressure are important factors for successful use of supraglottic airway devices in general anaesthesia. ^[22] The maximum inner diameter of the cuffed tracheal tube that could be inserted, the fibre-optic view score and the oropharyngeal leak pressure were also evaluated. ^[23] Recently, it has been suggested that the accuracy of LMA placement can be determined by clinical signs such as oropharyngeal leak pressure (OPLP). ^[24] This prospective, randomized controlled study compared the efficacy of airway seal by measuring the oropharyngeal leak pressure in 100 surgical patients who underwent a variety of non-thoracic surgery under general anaesthesia, suitable with a supraglottic airway device. ^[25] The oropharyngeal leak pressure was the primary outcome measure. ^[26]