Safety and Effectiveness of SLIPA versus Endotracheal Tube for Intraoperative Airway Management during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Surgery: A Meta-Analysis_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

LI Ping , DU Yu ,  WANG Jian

Anesthesia Department, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China;

Corresponding author：

WANG Jian, Email: wang-j-85421837@126.com

Keywords：

SLIPA; Endotracheal tube; Laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgery; Randomized controlled trial; Meta-analysis

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.20120171

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective 　To systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of streamlined liner of the pharynx airway (SLIPA) compared with endotracheal tube (TT) for airway management in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgery.
Methods 　Databases such as PubMed (1992 to February 2012), EMbase (1984 to February 2012), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1964 to February 2012), SCI (1992 to February 2012), CNKI (1992 to February 2012), CBM (2002 to 2012) as well as WanFang Data (1992 to February 2012) were searched for relevant literature. The references of the included articles were also manually traced. Two reviewers independently screened the trials according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted the data, and assessed the quality of methodology. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.0 software.
Results 　Ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 664 patients were included. Results of meta-analysis showed that: a) as for side effects, none of the patients experienced regurgitation or hypoventilation during operation; b) as for extubation response, SLIPA was proved fewer than TT during extubation with a significant difference (RR=0.14, 95%CI 0.05 to 0.36, P lt;0.000 1); c) SLIPA was superior to TT with regard to reducing postoperative sore throat (RR=0.15, 95%CI 0.06 to 0.38, P lt;0.000 1); d) SLIPA was similar to TT with regard to Ppeak after peritoneal insufflations (WMD=–0.07, 95%CI –0.73 to 0.59, P=0.83); e) as for PETCO2, the SLIPA group was lower than the TT group obviously after peritoneal insufflations (WMD=–1.09, 95%CI –1.70 to –0.49, P=0.000 4); f) as for hemodynamic change, the SLIPA group was more stable than the TT group during the operation with significant differences (P lt;0.05).
Conclusion 　Current studies suggest that it is safe and effective to apply SLIPA for ventilation in laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgery. However, due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high-quality studies are need.

Citation： LI Ping,DU Yu,WANG Jian. Safety and Effectiveness of SLIPA versus Endotracheal Tube for Intraoperative Airway Management during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Surgery: A Meta-Analysis. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2012, 12(9): 1098-1104. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20120171 Copy

1.	Joshi GP. Anesthesia for laparoscopic surgery. Can J Anesth, 2002, 49(6): 1-5.
2.	Klimek M, Klein J. Can the laryngeal mask airway replace endotracheal tubation for airway control? The argument against the laryngeal mask airway. The Israel Medical Association Journal, 2004, 6(4): 242-244.
3.	Miller DM. A proposed classification and scoring system for supraglottic sealing airways: a brief review. Anesth Analg, 2004, 99: 1553-1559.
4.	Miller DM, Light D. Laboratory and clinical comparisons of the streamlined liner of the pharynx airway(SLIPA)with the laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia, 2003, 58(2): 136-142.
5.	Puri GD, Hegde HV, jayant A, et al. Haemodynamic and Bisectral index response to insertion of the Streamlined Liner of the pharynx Airway(SLIPATM): comparison with the laryngeal mask airway. Anesth Intensive Care, 2008, 36(3): 404-410.
6.	Miller DM, Camporota L. Advantages of ProSeal and SLIPA airway over tracheal tubes for gynecolocal laparoscopies. Can J Anaesth, 2006, 53(2): 188-193.
7.	周森, 叶文艳. SLIPA喉罩对腹腔镜手术气腹前后气道压力的影响. 实用医学杂志.2010, 26(21): 3920-3922.
8.	周玲, 疏树华. SLIPA喉罩和气管插管全麻在腹腔镜胆囊手术中的应用比较. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2011,27(1): 44-46.
9.	雷勇静, 张宣. SLIPA喉罩全凭七氟醚吸入麻醉在腹腔镜手术中的应用. 华北煤炭医学院学, 2010,12(3): 309-311.
10.	吕斌, SLIPA喉罩用于腹腔镜胆囊切除术全麻气道的观察. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2011, 27(2): 201-202.
11.	洪黎霞, 王坚. SLIPA喉罩与气管插管麻醉在腹腔镜胆囊切除手术的应用比较. 中华现代护理杂志, 2010, 16(16): 1898-1900.
12.	井郁陌, 荆国明. SLIPA喉罩与气管插管在老年全麻手术中的应用比较. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2010, 26(7): 587-589.
13.	李国兰, 贺昌林. SLIPA喉罩与气管导管在全麻中的应用比较.浙江实用医学, 2010, 15(4): 286-287.
14.	楼京, SLIPA喉罩在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中的应用. 中国医师进修杂志, 2010, 33(35): 57-59.
15.	胡友洋, 骆宏. 腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者SLIPA喉罩和PLMA喉罩气道管理的效果. 中华麻醉学杂志, 2010, 30(5): 636-637.
16.	王青云, 王强, 陈瑛. 喉罩在腹腔镜手术中的应用. 医学信息, 2011, 05: 1772-1773.
17.	Jackson KM. Cook TM, Evaluation of four airway training manikins as patient simulators for the insertion of eight types of supraglottic airway devices. Anaesthesia, 2007, 62: 388-393.
18.	徐建设, 陈辉, 傅卫军. SLIPA喉罩用于全麻短小手术的观察. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2008, 24: 992-993.

1. Joshi GP. Anesthesia for laparoscopic surgery. Can J Anesth, 2002, 49(6): 1-5.
2. Klimek M, Klein J. Can the laryngeal mask airway replace endotracheal tubation for airway control? The argument against the laryngeal mask airway. The Israel Medical Association Journal, 2004, 6(4): 242-244.
3. Miller DM. A proposed classification and scoring system for supraglottic sealing airways: a brief review. Anesth Analg, 2004, 99: 1553-1559.
4. Miller DM, Light D. Laboratory and clinical comparisons of the streamlined liner of the pharynx airway(SLIPA)with the laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia, 2003, 58(2): 136-142.
5. Puri GD, Hegde HV, jayant A, et al. Haemodynamic and Bisectral index response to insertion of the Streamlined Liner of the pharynx Airway(SLIPATM): comparison with the laryngeal mask airway. Anesth Intensive Care, 2008, 36(3): 404-410.
6. Miller DM, Camporota L. Advantages of ProSeal and SLIPA airway over tracheal tubes for gynecolocal laparoscopies. Can J Anaesth, 2006, 53(2): 188-193.
7. 周森, 叶文艳. SLIPA喉罩对腹腔镜手术气腹前后气道压力的影响. 实用医学杂志.2010, 26(21): 3920-3922.
8. 周玲, 疏树华. SLIPA喉罩和气管插管全麻在腹腔镜胆囊手术中的应用比较. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2011,27(1): 44-46.
9. 雷勇静, 张宣. SLIPA喉罩全凭七氟醚吸入麻醉在腹腔镜手术中的应用. 华北煤炭医学院学, 2010,12(3): 309-311.
10. 吕斌, SLIPA喉罩用于腹腔镜胆囊切除术全麻气道的观察. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2011, 27(2): 201-202.
11. 洪黎霞, 王坚. SLIPA喉罩与气管插管麻醉在腹腔镜胆囊切除手术的应用比较. 中华现代护理杂志, 2010, 16(16): 1898-1900.
12. 井郁陌, 荆国明. SLIPA喉罩与气管插管在老年全麻手术中的应用比较. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2010, 26(7): 587-589.
13. 李国兰, 贺昌林. SLIPA喉罩与气管导管在全麻中的应用比较.浙江实用医学, 2010, 15(4): 286-287.
14. 楼京, SLIPA喉罩在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中的应用. 中国医师进修杂志, 2010, 33(35): 57-59.
15. 胡友洋, 骆宏. 腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者SLIPA喉罩和PLMA喉罩气道管理的效果. 中华麻醉学杂志, 2010, 30(5): 636-637.
16. 王青云, 王强, 陈瑛. 喉罩在腹腔镜手术中的应用. 医学信息, 2011, 05: 1772-1773.
17. Jackson KM. Cook TM, Evaluation of four airway training manikins as patient simulators for the insertion of eight types of supraglottic airway devices. Anaesthesia, 2007, 62: 388-393.
18. 徐建设, 陈辉, 傅卫军. SLIPA喉罩用于全麻短小手术的观察. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2008, 24: 992-993.

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Safety and Effectiveness of SLIPA versus Endotracheal Tube for Intraoperative Airway Management during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Surgery: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content