Supreme喉罩用于妇科腹腔镜手术患者气道管理的效果

目的 评价Supreme喉罩用于妇科腹腔镜手术患者气道管理的效果.方法 择期行妇科腹腔镜手术的患者80例,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄40～64岁,体重50～70 kg,身高158～170 cm,Mallampatis分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,随机分为2组(n=40):Supreme喉罩组(S组)和ProSeal喉罩组(P组).麻醉诱导后置入喉罩,行机械通气,并经引流管置入胃管.记录手术时间、气腹时间、清醒时间、喉罩置入时间、喉罩及胃管置入情况;记录喉罩囊内压为60 cm H2O时的充气量和气道密封压,并采用纤维支气管镜进行通气罩咽部解剖结构显露分级;术中监测BP、HR、ECG、SpO2、PETCO2,记录术后咽喉部不良反应的发生情况.结果 两组手术时间、气腹时间、清醒时间比较差异无统计意义(P＞0.05).两组术中BP、HR、SpO2、PETCO2、气道峰压均在正常范围,组间比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).与P组比较,S组喉罩一次置入成功率、胃管一次置入成功率升高,喉罩置入时间缩短,通气罩咽部解剖结构显露分级升高,术后喉罩带血的发生率降低(P＜0.05);两组喉罩置入成功率均为100%,喉罩置入成功率、气道密封压、喉罩充气量比较差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 Supreme喉罩通气效果好,气道密封性可靠,易于置入,可安全有效地用于妇科腹腔镜手术患者的气道管理.     

喉导管与SLIPA喉罩用于肥胖患者腹腔镜手术气道管理效果的比较

目的 比较喉导管与SLIPA喉罩用于肥胖患者腹腔镜手术气道管理的效果.方法 择期腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者60例,年龄40～60岁,性别不限,体重指数＞30 kg/m2,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,采用随机数字表法,将其随机分为2组(n=30);喉导管组(Ⅰ组)和SLIPA喉罩组(Ⅱ组).两组均靶控输注异丙酚(血浆靶浓度3～5 μg/ml)和瑞芬太尼(血浆靶浓度4～6 ng/ml),静脉注射罗库溴铵0.6mg/kg,BIS值50 ～ 60时置入喉导管或SLIPA喉罩,行机械通气.观察指标:置入前后即刻、拔除前后即刻的HR、MAP;置入时间及次数；纤维支气管镜检查分级(评价置入位置)；气道密封压;术中SpO2、气道峰压(Ppeak)和PETCO2；气道管理失败、术中误吸及咽部不良反应的发生情况.结果 与Ⅱ组比较,Ⅰ组置入时间缩短(P＜0.05)；纤维支气管镜检查分级、气道密封压及咽部不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).两组一次置入成功率均大于90％,术中气道管理失败率为0,未见误吸发生；两组置入前后、拔除前后HR及MAP差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)；术中SpO2、Ppeak、PETCO2均维持在正常范围.结论 喉导管和SLIPA喉罩均可安全有效地用于肥胖患者腹腔镜手术的气道管理,而喉导管更易置入.     

妇科手术患者Guardian喉罩与Supreme喉罩气道管理效果的比较

目的 比较Guardian喉罩与Supreme喉罩用于妇科手术患者气道管理的效果.方法 择期全麻下行妇科手术患者120例,年龄19～80岁,体重50～70kg,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,随机分为2组:Supreme喉罩组(S组,n=59)和Guardian喉罩组(G组,n=61).麻醉诱导后置入4号喉罩,行机械通气.术中监测BP、HR、SpO2、PETCO2和Ppeak.记录喉罩置人情况、置入时间、纤维支气管镜检查分级、气道密封压、正常通气时(VT 8 ml/kg)的气道压、大潮气量(VT20 ml/kg)通气试验时的气道压和漏气的发生情况、术中口咽部漏气的发生情况、拔除喉罩时不良反应和术后咽喉部不良反应的发生情况、麻醉时间、手术时间、喉罩拔除时间和苏醒时间.结果 两组喉罩置入成功率、置入时间、正常通气时的气道压、大潮气量通气试验时的气道压、拔除喉罩时罩体带血和术后咽喉疼痛、声音嘶哑和吞咽困难的发生率、麻醉时间、手术时间、喉罩拔除时间和苏醒时间差异无统计学意义(P＜0.05).两组患者BP、HR、SpO2、Ppeak和PETCO2均在正常范围内.与S组比较,G组纤维支气管镜检查分级和气道密封压升高,大潮气量通气试验时漏气和术中口咽部漏气的发生率降低(P＜0.01).结论 Guardian喉罩和Supreme喉罩置入简单易行,气道密封效果好,可有效保证通气,对咽喉部的刺激小.Guardian喉罩用于妇科手术患者气道管理的效果更好.     

i-gel喉罩用于腹腔镜胆囊手术患者气道管理的效果

目的 评价i-gel喉罩用于腹腔镜胆囊手术患者气道管理的效果.方法 择期全麻下拟行腹腔镜胆囊手术患者120例,性别不限,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄34～62岁,体重45～90 kg,随机分为2组(n=60):ProSeal喉罩组(P组)和i-gel喉罩组(Ⅰ组).根据体重选择喉罩型号,麻醉诱导后置入喉罩,行机械通气,并经引流管放置胃管.记录喉罩置入次数、喉罩及胃管置入情况、纤支镜检查评分,测定喉罩密封压,观察术中口咽部漏气、低氧血症的发生情况.术中监测SpO2、PETCO2、气道峰压,观察拔除喉罩后恶心、呕吐、呛咳、声嘶、咽喉痛、返流误吸的发生情况,记录麻醉时间、手术时间、拔除喉罩时间及苏醒时间.结果 两组麻醉时间、手术时间、拔除喉罩时间及苏醒时间差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).两组术中SpO2、PETCO2、气道峰压均在正常范围内.与P组比较,Ⅰ组喉罩首次置入成功率和纤支镜检查评分升高,喉罩置入时间缩短(P＜0.05).两组喉罩和胃管置入成功率均为100%;Ⅰ组和P组喉罩密封压比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);Ⅰ组咽喉痛发生率低于P组(P＜0.05),恶心呕吐、呛咳发生率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),两组无一例发生声嘶、返流误吸.结论 i-gel喉罩易于置入,气道密封性可靠,通气效果好,不良反应少,可安全有效地用于腹腔镜胆囊手术患者的气道管理.     

Supreme喉罩用于腹腔镜手术患者气道管理的效果

目的 评价Supreme喉罩用于腹腔镜手术患者气道管理的效果.方法 择期全麻下行腹腔镜手术的患者120例,性别不限,年龄35～60岁,体重48～85 kg,ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,Mallampatis Ⅰ～Ⅲ级,随机分为2组(n=60):Supreme喉罩组(S组)和气管插管组(T组).S组根据患者体重选择喉罩型号,麻醉诱导后置入喉罩,并经引流管放置胃管,T组在直接喉镜下行气管插管.记录气管插管或喉罩置入时间及置人情况;记录S组胃管置入状况和喉罩气道密封压,并行纤维支气管镜检查评分,以评价喉罩对位情况;记录术中SpO2、PrrCO2和气道峰压(Ppeak),记录拔除气管导管或喉罩后不良反应的发生情况;记录手术时间、麻醉时间、拔管时间和苏醒时间.结果 与T组比较,S组喉罩置入时间、拔管时间和苏醒时间缩短,拔除喉罩后低氧血症、呛咳、咽喉痛的发生率降低(P<0.05);两组均无返流误吸发生.各时点spO2、PETCO2、Ppeak均在正常范围内,组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).S组喉罩置入成功率和T组气管插管成功率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),S组喉罩气道密封压为(25±4)cm H2O,喉罩对位准确率95%,胃管放置成功率100%.结论 Supreme喉罩通气效果好,气道密封性可靠,拔除后不良反应少,可安全有效地用于腹腔镜手术患者的全麻气道管理.     

腹腔镜手术患者CLMA喉罩、SLIPA喉罩与PLMA喉罩气道管理的效果

目的 比较经典型喉罩(CLMA喉罩)、SLIPA喉罩和食管引流型喉罩(PLMA喉罩)用于腹腔镜手术患者气道管理的效果.方法 择期行腹腔镜手术患者123例,年龄20～64岁,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,随机分为3组:CLMA组(C组,n=41)、SLIPA组(S组,n=42)和PLMA组(P组,n=40).麻醉诱导后置入喉罩,行间歇正压通气.测定气道密封压后实施气腹.评估喉罩置入难易性.记录首次喉罩置入情况、喉罩置入时间、麻醉恢复时间和不良反应的发生情况.于气腹前及气腹压至12 mm Hg时记录气道吸气峰压(PIP)及气道密封压＜PIP的发生情况.结果 C组有1例患者更换喉罩型号后置入成功,其余患者均首次喉罩置入成功,组间比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).与C组比较,S组喉罩置入时间和麻醉恢复时间缩短,喉罩置入容易,P组喉罩置入时间延长,气道密封压升高,气道密封压＜PIP的患者减少(P＜0.05).与S组比较,P组喉罩置入时间和麻醉恢复时间延长,喉罩置入稍难,气道密封压升高,气道密封压＜PIP的患者减少(P＜0.05).与气腹前比较,各组气腹至12 mm Hg时PIP升高(P＜0.05).三组患者不良反应发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 CLMA喉罩、SLIPA喉罩和PLMA喉罩均可保证有效通气,不良反应少.SLIPA喉罩置入更简单,而PLMA喉罩气道密封效果好,更适用于腹腔镜手术患者.     

双管喉罩在老年患者腹腔镜胆囊切除手术中的应用

目的探讨双管喉罩(ProSealLMA)在老年患者腹腔镜胆囊切除手术中应用的有效性和安全性。方法60例择期腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者,ASAⅠ～Ⅲ级,年龄>60岁,体重指数<30kg/m2,随机均分为气管导管组(T组)和ProSeal喉罩组(P组)。观察患者入室后10min(T1)、插管前(T2)、插管后1min(T3)、5min(T4)、气腹前(T5)、气腹后15min(T6)、30min(T7)和气腹结束后10min(T8)的HR、BP、SpO2、呼气末二氧化碳分压(PETCO2)和气道峰压(Ppeak),在T1、T6和T8分别抽取动脉血进行血气分析,在气腹开始时和气腹完毕时进行胃张力评分,记录气腹时间和麻醉时间及拔管和术后并发症。结果两组患者一般情况、术中通气情况、血气分析及胃张力变化差异均无统计学意义。T组较P组插管时循环系统波动大(P<0.05),且拔管时呛咳发生率高(P<0.01)和术后咽痛发生率高(P<0.05)。结论双管喉罩可安全有效地应用于非肥胖老年患者的腹腔镜胆囊切除手术。     

双管喉罩与标准型喉罩用于妇科腹腔镜麻醉的比较

目的 比较双管喉罩(PLM)与标准型喉罩(CLM)用于妇科腹腔镜麻醉的实用性和安全性.方法 100例妇科腹腔镜择期患者随机分成PLM组(P组)和CLM组(L组),每组50例.观察两组插入时间与成功率、肺通气情况、气道密封压值、胃胀气情况、注意反流、拔管情况和术后有无咽痛.结果 P组平均置入时间明显长于L组(P＜0.05),P组首次置入成功率明显高于L组(P＜0.05).P组肺通气满意度、气道密封压明显优于L组(P＜0.05);结论与CLM相比,PLM增加插入成功率,能最大程度减少反流误吸风险,改善气道密封,减少漏气,术后并发症少.     

Supreme喉罩和Proseal喉罩用于腹腔镜手求患者气道管理的比较体会

目的：比较Supreme和Proseal喉罩用于腹腔镜手术患者的气道管理。方法：择期全麻下腹腔镜手术患者60例。随机分为S（Supreme喉罩）组和P（Proseal喉罩）组。记录喉罩置入时间．置入次数及胄管置入情况。分别记录置入喉罩后1min．5min及置入胃管5rain时的SpO2．SBp．DBp．Hr．气道峰压。结果;两组各时点的SpO2．SB-．DBe．Hr．PETCO2．Peak之间无统计学差异。S组置入喉罩时间短于P组喉罩置入时间．其中1次置入成功率91％．2次成功率100％。两组拔喉罩后不良反应的发生率之间无统计学差异。结论：Supreme喉罩置入快速．通气效果好．拔除后不良反应少,可安全有效地用于腹腔镜手术患者的全麻气道管理。     

不同充气量Supreme喉罩在妇科腹腔镜手术气道管理的研究

目的探讨不同充气量Supreme喉罩在妇科腹腔镜手术气道管理的效果。方法选择2016年1~7月全身麻醉下行择期妇科腹腔镜手术患者80例,随机分为四组,通气罩内分别予不同充气容量:A组15 ml,B组20 ml,C组25 ml,D组30 ml。记录所有患者喉罩置入情况,观察不同通气罩充气容量下喉罩成功置入后2 min(T0)、气腹并头低位后5 min(T)两个时段的通气罩内压(intracuff pressure,ICP)、口咽部漏气压(oropharyngeal leak pressure,OLP)和对应气道峰压Ppeak。比较术后咽喉部并发症情况。结果组间T0和T时点OLP、Ppeak比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05),而四组间T0时和T时多重ICP比较有统计学差异,B组高于A组,C组明显高于B组,D组明显高于C组(P0.05)。组内与T0时比较,各组T时ICP、OLP均降低,而Ppeak升高,差异均有统计学意义(P0.001)。在T0时及T时点OLP均高于对应的Ppeak,未发生漏气。从A组到D组,随着充气量增加,并发症发生率有增加趋势,组间并发症持续时间比较有统计学差异(P0.01)。各组术中均有少量反流液量,均未发生误吸。结论 3号SLMA通气罩充气量15 ml即可满足妇科腹腔镜手术的气道管理,围术期咽喉部并发症发生率低,持续时间短,值得临床借鉴。     

低套囊压力下ProSeal或Supreme喉罩用于腹腔镜手术患者气道管理的效果

目的 评价低套囊压力下ProSeal和Supreme喉罩用于腹腔镜手术患者气道管理的效果.方法 择期仰卧位腹腔镜手术患者60例,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄20～70岁,体重50～80 kg,随机分为ProSeal喉罩组(P组)和Supreme喉罩组(S组),每组30例.喉罩置入成功后,用手持测压计监测套囊充气压力并维持其为35 cm H2O,记录气道密闭压及气腹前后机械通气时气道压峰值和平均气道压,记录术后并发症的发生情况.结果 两组气腹后机械通气时气道压峰值高于气腹前(P＜0.05),两组间比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);术中气腹前后均无漏气现象发生;两组气道密闭压比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);两组拔除喉罩后表面带有血丝及术后咽痛发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论低套囊压力(35 cm H2O)下ProSeal和Supreme喉罩通气效果均较好,可安全地用于腹腔镜手术患者的气道管理.     

The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in children

BACKGROUND: The ProSeal (PLMA) is a new laryngeal mask device with a modified cuff to improve the seal and a drain tube to provide access to the gastrointestinal tract. We assessed the performance of the size 2 (which has no dorsal cuff) and size 3 (which has a dorsal cuff) in terms of insertion success, efficacy of seal, tidal volume, gas exchange, fiberoptic position, gastric tube placement and frequency of problems. METHODS: Eighty children undergoing minor surgery were studied (n = 40, size 2 PLMA, weight 10-25 kg; n = 40, size 3 PLMA, weight >25-50 kg). Induction was with remifentanil and propofol. Insertion was with the introducer tool and by experienced users. Maintenance was with propofol or sevoflurane and pressure controlled ventilation. RESULTS: The first-time and overall insertion success rate was 84 and 100%, respectively. Oropharyngeal leak pressure was 31 +/- 5 cmH2O. There were no gastric or drain tube air leaks. Tidal volume and gas exchange was adequate in all patients, other than two brief episodes of hypoxia because of airway reflex activation. The vocal cords and epiglottis were visible in 99 and 80%, respectively, via the airway tube. The first-time and overall insertion success rate for gastric tube insertion was 87 and 100%, respectively. During maintenance, the PLMA was removed in one patient with airway reflex activation and another required epinephrine for bronchospasm. There were no differences in performance between the sizes 2 and 3 PLMA. CONCLUSION: The PLMA is an effective airway device in children and isolates the glottis from the esophagus when correctly positioned. Despite the lack of a dorsal cuff, the performance of the size 2 was similar to the size 3 PLMA in the age groups tested.     

Maximum minute ventilation test for the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway

One of the distinguishing features of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is that it can cause upper airway obstruction, even when it is correctly inserted behind the cricoid cartilage. We used a hyperventilation test, the maximum minute ventilation test (MMV test), to aid in the diagnosis of upper airway obstruction after PLMA insertion. The patient was briefly hyperventilated for 15 s yielding a MMV value equal to 4 x (breaths/15 s) x (exhaled tidal volume). MMV values were collected in 317 adult women and men over 6 mo. Critical MMV values were obtained in 17 of 317 patients, 15 of 317 (4.7%) of which were due to insertion of the PLMA. The PLMA was removed in seven of 317 (2.2%) patients. The most common cause of upper airway obstruction due to the PLMA was laryngeal obstruction. This refers to compression of supraglottic and glottic structures with resulting narrowing and compromise of the airway. A second, much less common, form of airway obstruction was bilateral cuff infolding with or without downfolding of the epiglottis. Finally, we discuss the margin of safety for minute ventilation, defined as the excess of the MMV over and above basal minute ventilation requirements for the patient. With critical MMV, the margin of safety is drastically reduced or nonexistent. IMPLICATIONS: One of the distinguishing features of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is that it can cause upper airway obstruction, even when it is correctly inserted behind the cricoid cartilage. We used a hyperventilation test, the maximum minute ventilation test, to aid in the diagnosis of upper airway obstruction after PLMA insertion.     

吸引型喉导管与食管引流型喉罩在腹腔镜手术麻醉中的应用

目的：探讨吸引型喉导管与食管引流型喉罩用于腹腔镜手术麻醉通气的效果。方法：择期腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者32例,随机分为吸引型喉导管组（LTS组）与食管引流型喉罩组（PLMA组）,进行麻醉中通气。结果：LTS组与PLMA组气腹前后,放气腹前后pH、PaCO2各组内与本组间比较无明显差异（P〉0.05）。PETCO2、SpO2于气腹前后无明显差异（P〉0.05）。Ppeak、VT于气腹前后差异明显（P〈0.05）,Ppeak于放气腹前后也有明显差异（P〈0.05）。结论：LTS与PLMA用于全麻腹腔镜手术通气,气腹建立时VT由8mL/kg调整为10mL/kg,可避免CO2气腹引起的PaCO2升高,通气效果可维持稳定。     

i-gel喉罩用于神经介入术患者气道管理的效果

目的 评价i-gel喉罩用于神经介入术患者气道管理的效果.方法 择期行神经介入术患者40例,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄20～60岁,体重指数＜30 kg/m2,随机分为2组(n=20):i-gel喉罩组(Ⅰ组)和ProSeal喉罩组(P组).TCI异丙酚和瑞芬太尼麻醉诱导后置入喉罩,行机械通气,维持PETCO2 35～40 mm Hg,SpO2 99%～100%.于麻醉诱导前、诱导后即刻、置入喉罩后1、3、5 min和拔除喉罩即刻,记录BP和HR;记录喉罩置入成功情况、置入时间、漏气压和气道峰压;记录喉罩置入与拔除过程中呛咳、喉痉挛、血迹残留、误吸的发生情况;术后24 h内随访患者咽痛、声音嘶哑、腹胀腹痛的发生.结果 两组患者BP和HR均在正常范围内.两组喉罩置入成功率、喉罩置入时间和气道峰压比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).与P组比较,Ⅰ组漏气压、血迹残留和咽痛的发生率降低(P＜0.05).结论 i-gel喉罩置入简单易行,气道密封效果好,可有效保证通气,不良反应少,可安全地用于神经介入术患者的气道管理.     

A comparison of the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal and the laryngeal tube airway in paralyzed anesthetized adult patients undergoing pressure-controlled ventilation

We compared the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal (PLMA) and the laryngeal tube airway (LTA), two new extraglottic airway devices, with respect to: 1) insertion success rates and times, 2) efficacy of seal, 3) ventilatory variables during pressure-controlled ventilation, 4) tidal volume in different head/neck positions, and 5) airway interventional requirements. One-hundred-twenty paralyzed anesthetized ASA physical status I and II adult patients were randomly allocated to the PLMA or LTA for airway management. A standardized anesthesia protocol was followed by two anesthesiologists experienced with both devices. The criteria for an effective airway included a minimal expired tidal volume of 6 mL/kg during pressure-controlled ventilation at 17 cm H(2)O with no oropharyngeal leak or gastric insufflation. First attempt success rates at achieving an effective airway were similar (PLMA: 85%; LTA: 87%), but after 3 attempts, success was more frequent for the PLMA (100% versus 92%, P = 0.02). Effective airway time was similar. Oropharyngeal leak pressure was larger for PLMA at 50% maximal recommended cuff volume (29 +/- 7 versus 21 +/- 6 cm H(2)O, P < 0.0001), but was similar at the maximal recommended cuff volume (33 +/- 7 versus 31 +/- 8 cm H(2)O). Tidal volumes (614 +/- 173 versus 456 +/- 207 mL, P < 0.0001) were larger and ETCO(2) (33 +/- 9 versus 40 +/- 11 mm Hg, P = 0.0001) lower for the PLMA. The number of airway interventions was significantly less frequent for the PLMA. Airway obstruction was more common with the LTA. When comparing mean tidal volumes in different head/neck positions, the quality of airway was unchanged in 56 of 60 patients (93%) with the PLMA and 42 of 55 (76%) with the LTA (P = 0.01). The PLMA offers advantages over the LTA in most technical aspects of airway management in paralyzed patients undergoing pressure-controlled ventilation. IMPLICATIONS: The laryngeal mask airway ProSeal offers advantages over the laryngeal tube airway in most technical aspects of airway management in paralyzed patients undergoing pressure-controlled ventilation.     

i-gel喉罩用于妇科腹腔镜手术患者气道管理的效果

目的 评价i-gel喉罩用于妇科腹腔镜手术患者气道管理的效果.方法 择期全麻下拟行妇科腹腔镜手术患者60例,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄21～64岁,体重45～90 kg,Mallampatti分级Ⅰ～Ⅲ级,采用随机数字表法,将其随机分为2组(n=30):i-gel喉罩组(I组)和Supreme喉罩组(S组).根据体重选择喉罩型号,麻醉诱导后置入喉罩,经引流管放置胃管,行机械通气.记录喉罩置入时间、置入次数、胃管置入次数、喉罩密封压、纤维支气管镜检查分级、术中血液动力学指标、通气指标、麻醉时间和苏醒时间,记录拔除喉罩后咽喉痛、吞咽痛和声音嘶哑的发生情况.结果 两组麻醉时间、苏醒时间、喉罩置入时间、纤维支气管镜检查分级、术中血液动力学指标和通气指标差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).两组喉罩和胃管置入成功率均为100%.与S组比较,I组喉罩密封压升高,咽喉痛和吞咽痛发生率降低(P<0.05或0.01).结论 i-gel喉罩气道密封性可靠,并发症少,可安全有效地应用于妇科腹腔镜手术患者的气道管理.

Abstract：

Objective To assess the efficacy of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) i-gel used in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery. Methods Sixty ASA Ⅰ or Ⅱ patients, aged 21-64 yr, weighing 4590 kg, undergoing elective laparoscopic gynecological surgery, were randomized into 2 groups ( n = 30 each):LMA i-gel group (group Ⅰ) and LMA Supreme group (group S) . Mallampatti test was performed before operation in both groups. Anesthesia was induced with target-controlled infusion of propofol (target plasma concentration 2.5-4.0 μg/ml) and remifentanil (target plasma concentration 3-6 ng/ml) . After the patients lost consciousness, rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg was given to facilitate the LMA insertion. LMA i-gel and LMA Supreme were inserted in I and S groups respectively. A gastric tube was inserted through the drain tube of the LMA. In group S the air was injected into the cuff to make intracuff pressure reach 60 cm H2O after successful LMA insertion. The LMA placement time, the number of attempts of LMA insertion, the number of attempts of gastric tube placement, the airway sealing pressure, the parameters of hemodynamics and ventilation, and complications (sore throat, odynopliagia,hoarseness) were recorded. The fiberoptic laryngoscopy scores were assessed after successful LMA placement. The anesthesia time and recovery time were also recorded. Results There was no significant difference in the anesthesia time, recovery time, LMA placement time, fiberoptic bronchoscopy scores and the parameters of hemodynamics and ventilation between the two group. The success rates of LMA and gastric tube placement were 100% in both groups. The airway sealing pressure was significantly higher, while the incidence of sore throat and odynopliagia was significantly lower in group I than in group S. Conclusion LMA i-gel provides adequate ventilation during operation with fewer complications and can be used effectively for gynecological laparoscopic surgery.