Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1998 Apr;88(4):970-7.
doi: 10.1097/00000542-199804000-00017.

A randomized controlled trial comparing the cuffed oropharyngeal airway and the laryngeal mask airway in spontaneously breathing anesthetized adults

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

A randomized controlled trial comparing the cuffed oropharyngeal airway and the laryngeal mask airway in spontaneously breathing anesthetized adults

R S Greenberg et al. Anesthesiology. 1998 Apr.

Abstract

Background: The cuffed oropharyngeal airway (COPA), a modified Guedel airway, was compared with the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) during spontaneous breathing anesthesia. Specifically examined were ease of use, physiologic tolerance, and the frequency of problems.

Methods: Adult patients consented to random (2:1) assignment to either COPA (n = 302) or LMA (n = 151) for airway management during anesthesia with propofol, nitrous oxide, and oxygen.

Results: Ease of insertion was similar, but the first-time successful insertion rate was higher with the LMA (COPA, 81% compared with LMA, 89%; P = 0.05). More brief manipulations (head tilt, chin lift, jaw thrust) were reported in the COPA group (average total number of manipulations: COPA, 1.1 +/- 1.6 compared with LMA, 0.1 +/- 0.2; P < 0.001). Continuous airway support was used more frequently in the COPA group (COPA, 30% compared with LMA, 0%; P < 0.0005). The incidences of aspiration, regurgitation, laryngospasm, wheezing, succinylcholine administration, oxygen saturation (SpO2) < 92%, failed use, and minor intraoperative problems were similar. When the airways were removed, blood was detected on the COPA less frequently than on the LMA (COPA, 5.8% compared with LMA, 15.3%; P = 0.001). The incidence of early and late sore throat was greater with the LMA (early: COPA, 4.7% compared with LMA, 21.9% [P = 0.001]; late: COPA, 8.4% compared with LMA, 16.1%; P = 0.01). The LMA did better than the COPA when anesthetists analyzed the technical aspects of the two devices.

Conclusions: Although the COPA and LMA are equivalent devices in terms of physiologic alterations and overall clinical problems associated with their use, the LMA was associated with a higher first-time insertion rate and fewer manipulations, suggesting that it is easier to use. The COPA was associated with less blood on the device and fewer sore throats, suggesting it may cause less pharyngeal trauma. Ultimately, both devices were similar in establishing a safe and effective airway for spontaneously breathing anesthetized adults.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Conflict of interest and the COPA.
    Goto T, Uezono S. Goto T, et al. Anesthesiology. 1999 Apr;90(4):1234-6. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199904000-00059. Anesthesiology. 1999. PMID: 10201710 No abstract available.
  • From something old something new.
    Rendell-Baker L. Rendell-Baker L. Anesthesiology. 2000 Mar;92(3):913-8. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200003000-00064. Anesthesiology. 2000. PMID: 10719992 No abstract available.

LinkOut - more resources