Abstract
The intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA; LMA-FastrachTM, Laryngeal Mask Company, Ltd., Henley on Thames, UK) has been shown to provide successful blind tracheal intubation through the airway. Laryngeal mask airway insertion is associated with fewer circulatory responses than tracheal intubation using a laryngoscope. We studied the circulatory responses to either endotracheal intubation performed through the ILMA or to those following laryngoscopy in 57 patients with ASA physical status I or II. In a randomized manner, endotracheal intubations using ILMA or a laryngoscope were performed after the induction of anesthesia with 2 mg•kg-1 of propofol, followed by vecuronium (0.1-0.15mg•kg-1) and a continuous infusion of propofol at a rate of 10mg•kg-1•h-1. Systolic arterial pressure and heart rate increased significantly (p<0.05) after tracheal intubation in both groups, and there was no difference in the magnitude of those increases between the groups. These results indicate that ILMA does not have an advantage over direct laryngoscopy in reducing the circulatory responses to tracheal intubation.
