ArticleBMC anesthesiology2020
Clinical performance of the LMA Protector™ airway in moderately obese patients.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of the efficacy of supraglottic airway devices in low-risk adult patients: a network meta-analysis and systematic review.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- Randomized Assessment of Airway Seal Pressure and Insertion Dynamics: I-gel versus Laryngeal Mask Airway Protector in Adult Difficult Airway Simulation in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgeries.Annals of African medicine · 2026Trial
- Age-related differences in the performance of the self-pressurising air-Q intubating laryngeal airway: a prospective comparative study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Comparison of i-gel®, Ambu® AuraGain™, Baska Mask, LMA® Protector™ for airway management of obese surgical patients - A randomised comparative study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Influence of patient body weight on the probability of return of spontaneous circulation following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: an exploratory analysis.British paramedic journal · 2024Article
- Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure of LMA Protector and LMA ProSeal in anaesthetised paralysed patients - A randomised controlled trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023Article
- Assessing a novel second generation laryngeal mask airway using the 'ADEPT' approach: results from the LMA® Protector™ observational study.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe 4th National Audit Project of The Royal College of Anaesthetists and The Difficult Airway Society (NAP4) reported a higher incidence of supraglottic airway device (SAD) related pulmonary aspiration in obese patients especially with the first-generation SADs. The latest single-use SAD, the Protector™ provides a functional separation of the respiratory and digestive tracts and its laryngeal cuff with two ports allowing additional suction in tandem with the insertion of a gastric tube. The laryngeal cuff of LMA Protector™ allows a large catchment reservoir in the event of gastric content aspiration.
methodsWe evaluated the performance characteristics of the LMA Protector™ in 30 unparalysed, moderately obese patients. First attempt insertion rate, time for insertion, oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), and incidence of complications were recorded.
resultsWe found high first and second attempt insertion rates of 28(93%) and 1(33%) respectively, with one failed attempt where no capnography trace could be detected, presumably from a downfolded device tip. The LMA Protector™ was inserted rapidly in 21.0(4.0) seconds and demonstrated high OLP of 31.8(5.4) cmH2O. Fibreoptic assessment showed a clear view of vocal cords in 93%. The incidence of blood staining on removal of device was 48%, postoperative sore throat 27%, dysphagia 10% and dysphonia 20% (all self-limiting, resolving a few hours postoperatively).
conclusionsWe conclude that the LMA Protector™ was associated with easy, expedient first attempt insertion success, demonstrating high oropharyngeal pressures and good anatomical position in the moderately obese population, with relatively low postoperative airway morbidity.
trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617001152314 . Registered 7 August 2017.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.