Published: 2016-12-16

A comparative study between ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal tube for ease of insertion and haemodynamic changes in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia

Veena Patodi, Maina Singh, Surendra K. Sethi, Vini N. Depal, Neena Jain, Vijay Kumar


Background: The endotracheal tube is considered a gold standard for providing a safe and effective glottic seal, especially for laparoscopic procedures under general anaesthesia. However, haemodynamic pressor responses associated with its use might be detrimental. The ProSeal LMA minimizes this response without compromising the airway with lesser incidence of complications. The aim of this study was to compare ProSeal LMA and Endotracheal tube with respect to intra-operative haemodynamic responses and ease of insertion of device and nasogastric tube in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries under general anaesthesia.

Methods: This prospective randomized study was conducted on sixty patients, aged 20-60 years; of ASA grade 1 or 2, 30 in each group, posted for laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia. After induction with propofol and neuromuscular blockade with rocuronium, PLMA or ETT was inserted. The haemodynamic responses and insertion time of device and nasogastric tube were noted. Postoperative complications, if any were also noted.

Results: The mean time of insertion of PLMA was 37.40±16.09 seconds and for intubation (ETT) was 31.17±20.89 seconds which was statistically not significant (P >0.05). The mean time of insertion of nasogastric tube was 18.84±6.84 seconds in PLMA group and 73.00±71.06 seconds in the ETT group which was highly significant, (P <0.001). There was a statistically significant increase in the heart rate(HR),systolic blood pressure (SBP),diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) at intubation that persisted till 5 minutes of intubation and also at the time of extubation in ETT group, (P <0.05). However, the haemodynamic parameters remained comparable to baseline values, after insertion of ProSeal and at its removal in PLMA group (P>0.05).

Conclusions: ProSeal LMA proved to be a suitable alternative to endotracheal tube for airway management with stable haemodynamics in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia.


Ease of insertion, Endotracheal tube, Haemodynamics, Laparoscopic surgeries, ProSeal LMA

Full Text:



King BD, Harris LC Jr, Greifenstein FE, Elder JD Jr, Dripps RD. Reflex circulatory responses to tracheal intubation performed during general anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1951;12:556.

Prys-Robert C, Green LT, Meloche R, Foëx P. Studies of anaesthesia in relation to hypertension. ΙІ. Haemodynamic consequences of induction and endotracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth. 1971;43:122-37.

Sharma B, Sood J, Sahai C, Kumar VP. Efficacy and Safety Performance of ProsealTM Laryngeal Mask Airway in Laparoscopic Surgery: Experience of 1000 Cases. Indian J Anaesth. 2008;52(3):288-96.

Keller C, Brimacombe J. Mucosal pressure and oropharyngeal leak pressure with the Proseal versus the Classic laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized paralysed patients. Br J Anaesth. 2000;85:262-66.

Brain AIJ. The laryngeal mask – a new concept in airway management. Br J Anaesth. 1983;55:801-5.

Maltby JR, Beriault MT, Watson NC, Liepert D, Fick GH. The LMA-ProSeal™ is an effective alternative to tracheal intubation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Can J Anesth. 2002;49:857-62.

Shroff P, Surekha K. Randomized comparative study between the proseal laryngeal mask airway and the endotracheal tube for laparoscopic surgery. Internet J Anesthesiol. 2006;11.

Misra MN, Ramamurthy B. The Pro-Seal LMAtm and the tracheal tube: A comparison of events at insertion of the airway device. Internet J Anesthesiol. 2008;16.

Saraswat N, Kumar A, Mishra A, Gupta A, Saurabh G, Srivastava U. The comparison of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal tube in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries under general anaesthesia. Indian J Anaesth. 2011;55:129-34.

Kannan S, Harsoor SS, Sowmiya L, Nethra SS, Devika RD, Sathesha M. Comparison of ventilator efficacy and airwaydynamics between ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal tube in adult patients during general anesthesia. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2015;31:517-21.

Piper SN, Triem JG, Rohm KD, Maleck WH, Schollhorn TA, Boldt J. ProSeal-laryngeal mask versus endotracheal intubation in patients undergoing gynaecologic laparoscopy. Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 2004;39:132-7.

Patel MG, Swadia V N, Bansal G. Prospective randomized comparative study of use of PLMA and ET tube for airway management in children under gen¬eral anaesthesia. Indian J Anaesth. 2010;54:109-15.

Carron M, Veronese S, Gomiero W, Foletto M, Nitti D, Ori C, Freo U. Hemodynamic and Hormonal Stress Responses to Endotracheal Tube and ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway for Laparoscopic Gastric Banding. Anesthesiology. 2012;117:309-20.

Lalwani J, Dubey KP, Sahu BS, Shah PJ. ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: An alternative to endotracheal intubation in paediatric patients for short duration surgical procedures. Indian J Anaesth. 2010;54:541-5.

Dave NM, Iyer HR, Dudhedia U, Makwana J. An evaluation of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway in Paediatric Laparoscopy. J Anaesth Clin Pharmacol. 2009;25:71-3.

Dorsch JA, Dorsch SE, editors. Supraglottic airway devices. In:Understanding Anesthesia Equipment. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer, Lipincott Williams and Wilkins. 2008;475.