Risk of Complications Using Laryngeal Mask Airway vs - TCU Harris 2025

Get Form
Risk of Complications Using Laryngeal Mask Airway vs - TCU Harris Preview on Page 1

Here's how it works

01. Edit your form online
Type text, add images, blackout confidential details, add comments, highlights and more.
02. Sign it in a few clicks
Draw your signature, type it, upload its image, or use your mobile device as a signature pad.
03. Share your form with others
Send it via email, link, or fax. You can also download it, export it or print it out.

How to change Risk of Complications Using Laryngeal Mask Airway vs - TCU Harris online

Form edit decoration
9.5
Ease of Setup
DocHub User Ratings on G2
9.0
Ease of Use
DocHub User Ratings on G2

With DocHub, making changes to your documentation requires just a few simple clicks. Make these quick steps to change the PDF Risk of Complications Using Laryngeal Mask Airway vs - TCU Harris online free of charge:

  1. Sign up and log in to your account. Log in to the editor with your credentials or click Create free account to examine the tool’s features.
  2. Add the Risk of Complications Using Laryngeal Mask Airway vs - TCU Harris for redacting. Click the New Document option above, then drag and drop the sample to the upload area, import it from the cloud, or via a link.
  3. Change your template. Make any changes needed: add text and photos to your Risk of Complications Using Laryngeal Mask Airway vs - TCU Harris, highlight important details, remove parts of content and replace them with new ones, and insert symbols, checkmarks, and areas for filling out.
  4. Finish redacting the template. Save the modified document on your device, export it to the cloud, print it right from the editor, or share it with all the people involved.

Our editor is super intuitive and efficient. Give it a try now!

be ready to get more

Complete this form in 5 minutes or less

Get form

Got questions?

We have answers to the most popular questions from our customers. If you can't find an answer to your question, please contact us.
Contact us
They may stimulate the gag reflex and, therefore, should not be used in a conscious or awake patient. Contraindications to elective use include poor pulmonary compliance, high airway resistance, pharyngeal pathology, risk for aspiration, and/or airway obstruction below the larynx.
A disadvantage with use of the LMA is the inability to use airway pressures greater than approximately 20 mm Hg to prevent air leaking around the mask and to avoid gastric distention, and therefore it is not an optimal airway device in patients with severe subglottic airway obstruction, parenchymal disease requiring
First, the technique for placement varies; inserting an LMA is generally quicker and requires less training than endotracheal intubation. However, the ETT provides superior protection against aspiration and is often preferred in high-risk surgical environments or in patients with compromised airways.
Complications from LMA use can be categorized into mechanical, traumatic, and pathophysiologic. Mechanical complications relate to the technical performance as an airway device and include failed insertion (0.3%4%), ineffective seal (
The major disadvantage to LMA devices is that it does not protect the airway from aspiration. Given that most patients in the ED will have full stomachs, LMAs are considered only a temporizing measure until a definitive airway is secured (i.e cuffed ETT in trachea).
be ready to get more

Complete this form in 5 minutes or less

Get form

People also ask

In most patients the autonomic response to placement is less pronounced than with laryngoscopy and intubation. On the other hand, the device does not fully protect against aspiration in the setting of a full stomach. In addition, it may not be effective in patients with glottic or subglottic pathology.
The most common contraindications to LMA placement include patients at risk of aspiration such as during pregnancy, trauma, pre-existing gastroparesis, intestinal obstruction, or emergency surgery in nonfasted patients.
The incidence of aspiration with the LMA has been estimated at 0.02%,3 which is similar to tracheal intubation in elective patients.

Related links