Printer Friendly

Effect of Laryngeal Mask Air Way Insertion versus Endotracheal Intubation over Hemodynamic Responses in Pediatrics Patient Who Underwent Ophthalmic Surgery at Menelik II Hospital, Addis Ababa: A Prospective Observational Study Design.

1. Background

Laryngeal mask airway (LMA) and endotracheal tube (ETT) intubation are among the most important artificial airway devices used at the time of general anesthesia [1]. Traditionally, ETT insertion has been recognized as the foundation of maintaining adequate airway management. LMA offers a much less invasive way of maintaining airway as it does not pass through glottis. Both are noxious stimuli which elicit transient or marked sympathetic response [2].

The increased blood pressure and heart rate occurring due to reflex sympathetic discharge from response of laryngotracheal stimulation may have little consequences in healthy individuals, but may be more severe or even dangerous in patients with hypertension, myocardial insufficiency, and cardiovascular disease [3, 4]. In addition, the sudden rise in blood pressure can lead to left ventricular failure, cerebral hemorrhage, and myocardial ischaemia [5].

Many drugs and techniques have been used to attenuate pressor responses following intubation, but no single technique has gained universal acceptance. Use of LMA in place of ETT tube has been shown to have less hemodynamic response as its insertion requires neither visualization of cords nor the penetration of larynx [3]. Some studies found differences in hemodynamic changes [6-8], but other did not find any difference between LMA and ETT [6].

Many studies have shown the effect of different combinations of anesthetic drugs on reducing the side effect of tracheal intubation on patients' hemodynamic parameters [9, 10]. Despite of combinations of various anesthetic agents used, there was higher increase in hemodynamic changes in the ETT group than in the LMA group [11, 12]. However, a significant difference was not observed with propofol anesthesia [13]. Similarly, administering sevoflurane and remifentanil combination did not find significant difference in hemodynamic changes [14].

In this study, we compared hemodynamic changes after LMA insertion and endotracheal ETT intubation to find out a better way of controlling the airway.

2. Methods and Materials

2.1. Study Setting. An institutional-based prospective observational study design was carried out at Menelik II Hospital from February 30 to April 30, 2017.

2.2. Study Participants. All pediatric patients who underwent elective ophthalmic surgery at Menelik II referral hospital were source population while all selected elective pediatric patients who underwent ophthalmic surgery with ETT or LMA at Menelik II hospital from February 30 to April 30, 2017 were study populations. In this study, ASA I and ASA II pediatrics patients aged between 1-12 years, patients with anticipated difficult air way, patients who underwent only mask ventilation, and parents who are unwilling to give written consent were excluded.

2.2.1. Sample Size. Continuous outcomes formula was used to calculate the sample size based on a previous study done in India [15], which showed a heart rate mean and standard deviation of 121.16 [+ or -] 19.90 and 111.24 [+ or -] 9.20 among the endotracheal intubation and laryngeal mask airway groups, respectively.

n = ([s.sup.2.sub.1] + [s.sup.2.sub.2])[(Z [alpha]/2 + z[beta]).sup.2], [([[mu].sub.1] - [[mu].sub.2]).sup.2], (1)

where Z [alpha]/2 = 1.96 for a p = 0.05 (95% confidence interval), Z[beta] = 0.84 for 20% beta error, S = standard deviation, and [mu] = heart rate mean.

n = [(19.90).sup.2] + [(9.20).sup.2] [(1.96 + 0.84).sup.2] [(121.16 - 111.24).sup.2], n = 38 patients in each group. (2)

Sample size was increased by 10% in order to replace for any dropouts so that the total sample size (n) became 42 in each group.

2.2.2. Sampling Procedure. A systematic random sampling technique was used to select study participants. The midyear population from situational analysis was 1080, and the size of population in 2 months was 360. Accordingly, the calculated sampling interval ^th = N/n = 360/84 = 4 and then, a random number 2 was chosen by a lottery method and every 4th subsequent patients on the day of data collection were included. This process was continued till the required sample size was achieved.

2.3. Data Collection Tools and Procedures. Structured questionnaires were used to gather information from patient's charts and to interview patient's family. Two Bachelor of Science (BSC) holder's and one Master of Science (MSC) holder's anesthetists with at least four year work experience were involved as data collectors and supervisors, respectively. Preoperative vital signs were considered as baseline line vital signs. Monitoring included electrocardiography, heart rate, pulse oximetry, end-tidal carbon dioxide measurement, and noninvasive blood pressure were applied, and an intravenous (IV) access was secured. Jaw thrust with mask ventilation was used for 3 min with 2% halothane in oxygen. All patients were induced by 2.5 mg/kg propofol, 1 mg/kg of ketamine, and 0.8mg/kg pethidine followed by induction of anesthesia with 1 mg/kg of suxamethonium. After ensuring adequacy of ventilation, vecuronium bromide 0.1 mg/kg was given for neuromuscular (NM) blockade. Surgery was started after five minutes of insertion of airway devices. Anesthesia was maintained using halothane in oxygen and vecuronium top ups for NM blockade. At the end of the surgery, the residual NM blockade was antagonized with neostigmine and atropine in appropriate dosages.

2.3.1. Data Quality Assurance. A pretest was done on 5% of the sample size outside study area. Training was given for data collectors and supervisors. Investigator made regular supervision and follow-up.

2.3.2. Data Management and Analyzing Procedure. Data were entered into Epi info version 7 computer programs and exported to SPSS version 20 computer programs for further analysis and cleaning. Before further analysis, normality of the data was checked using Shapiro-Wilk tests. An independent sample t test and a paired sample t test were used to determine the mean differences between the two groups and within the groups, respectively. In the meantime a p value < 0.05 was used to determine the presence of association.

2.4. Operational Definitions

Hemodynamic changes: changes in vital signs to airway manipulation.

Vital Signs: in this study it included BP, MAP, and PR.

Easy insertion: insertion of ETT or LMA in one attempt.

Difficult insertion: insertion of ETT or LMA more than two attempts.

3. Result

3.1. Socio-Demographic Characteristics. A total of 84 pediatrics ophthalmic patients were enrolled in the study of which the mean age of respondents for LMA was 6.45 [+ or -] SD (3.217) while the mean age of respondents for the ETTgroup was 6.57 [+ or -] SD (3.013). The overall mean age of respondents was 7.10 [+ or -] SD (6.033) (minimum 1 and maximum 12). It was also found that the overall mean weight of patients was 23.38 [+ or -] SD (15.803) (minimum 10 and maximum 32). 95.23% and 92.85% of patients were intubated with one attempt of LMA and ETT insertion, respectively (Table 1).

3.2. Mean Heart Rate of Pediatric Patients. The mean changes in the heart rate following ETT intubation and LMA insertion were 29.63 and 15.48, respectively. The elevation in the heart rate significantly persisted for a longer period of time in the ETT group. These elevations were returned to the baseline value in 5 minutes in the ETT group and 3 minutes in the LMA group. By 5 minutes, there was no significant difference between the two groups (p value = 0.627) (Table 2).

3.3. Mean Systolic Blood Pressure of Pediatric Patients. At baseline, the difference in systolic blood pressure (SBP) between the two groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.328). The increase within and between the two groups was statistically significant after insertion at (p < 0.05). It took 5 minutes for both ETT and LMA values to return to baseline (Table 3).

3.4. Mean Diastolic Blood Pressure of Pediatric Patients. The baseline diastolic blood pressure was comparable between the two groups. After insertion, both groups showed an increase in diastolic blood pressure (DBP) that was statistically significant within and between the groups. At three minutes, the difference within the LMA group was not statistically significant (p value = 0.143) while the difference within the ETT group was statistically significant (p value = 0.003) (Table 4).

3.5. Mean Arterial Blood Pressure of Pediatric Patients. There is no significant difference in the baseline mean arterial pressure (MAP) between the two groups. After instrumentation, the ETT group had an increase in MAP that was higher and more persistent as compared to the LMA group (Table 5).

4. Discussion

Pediatric ophthalmic surgery usually requires general anesthesia and tracheal intubation that may have deleterious effects on cardiovascular function [16, 17]. LMA has been found to be superior to tracheal intubation in terms of maintaining stable vital signs [18] but positive pressure ventilation could become a challenge in certain cases. LMA offers the advantage of providing a better seal in the oropharynx to allow ventilation at much higher pressure and to protect the stomach from gastric insufflation [19]. In our country Ethiopia, pressor response to insertion of supraglottic devices have not been compared to tracheal intubation and changes in vital signs following insertion have not been evaluated.

According to the result of the present study, there was a variation in hemodynamic parameters after the insertion of both LMA and ETT. Similarly, another study also found that a significant increase in mean value was observed among the ETT group [20, 21]. The findings of our study were also closely correlated with another multiple clinical studies as hemodynamic changes were less during the LMA placement than during tracheal intubation [22-24]. This may be likely due to insertion of an LMA is easier and takes a shorter time as compared to the ETT insertion so that the degree of stimulating sympathetic nervous system was slower and shorter.

According to the result of the present study, the LMA group showed a significant increase in HR and SBP, following insertion. However, the changes in the LMA group were significantly lower compared to the ETT group which agrees with other study [25]. This may be because LMA did not go through the trachea subsequently that caused less stimulation of the supraglottic region causing less activation of the hemodynamic response reflex. This explanation was supported by another study [26, 27].

Similar to our study, several other studies have demonstrated that the hemodynamic response to LMA is short lived as compared to that of ETT [23, 27]. The results of this study are also similar to those of the study done in Nigeria and Austria [20, 28]. The greater and more persistent changes in cardiovascular parameters seen with the ETT group is probably due to the sympthatoadrenal response caused by stimulation of the supraglottic region and that of the trachea [23]. This may also be likely due to insertion of laryngoscope with ETT may take longer time to perform which could translate to a longer stimulation period, leading to a greater hemodynamic response [29].

The limitations of this study were a large-scale prospective study that could not be conducted because of the time constraint and double blinding which was not possible due to operation theatre setup. This could mean that an element of observation bias was not completely removed from the study.

5. Conclusions

In this study, the magnitude and extent of increase in the heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and mean arterial pressure were significantly higher after endotracheal intubation than LMA insertion. Therefore, anesthetists should commonly use LMA for providing adequate airway management and reserve ETT for those who are contraindicated to use LMA. Further studies should be conducted on larger populations using a comparative randomized clinical trial to get a bigger picture of how the effect of the LMA and ETT would be in the Ethiopian population.

AAU:  Addis Ababa University
LMA:  Laryngeal mask airway
ETT:  Endotracheal tube.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Ethical Approval

Ethical approval was obtained from Addis Ababa University ethical review committee.


Informed written consent was secured from every guardian of study participants. Confidentiality and anonymity were ensured.


The funder has no role in study design, analysis, manuscript preparation, and decision for publication.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors' Contributions

AL has contributed to conception, design of the study, data acquisition, data entry, data analyses, result interpretation, manuscript development, and revision. MS, MM, BG, GD, and TB have contributed to conception, initial design of the study, data acquisition, data analyses, result interpretation, and manuscript development. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.


The authors would like to thank Addis Ababa University for providing financial support.


[1] L. Kilickan, N. Baykara, Y. Gurkan, and K. Toker, "The effect on intraocular pressure of endotracheal intubation or laryngeal mask use during TIVA withoutthe use of muscle relaxants," Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 343-346, 1999.

[2] B. Puthur, "A comparitive study on cardiovascular response and ease of insertion in classical laryngeal mask airway, Proseal Laryngeal Mask Airway and I-Gel during Surgery under General Anaesthesia," Journal of Evidence Based Medicine and Healthcare, vol. 2, no. 20, 2015.

[3] L. Dube and J.-C. Granry, "The therapeutic use of magnesium in anesthesiology, intensive care and emergency medicine: a review," Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal Canadien D'anesthesie, vol. 50, no. 7, pp. 732-746, 2003.

[4] M. Ziyaeifard, R. Azarfarin, and G. Massoumi, "A comparison of intraocular pressure and hemodynamic responses to insertion of laryngeal mask airway or endotracheal tube using anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil in cataract surgery," Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 503-507, 2012.

[5] C. A. Hagberg, Benumofs Airway Management, Elsevier Health Sciences, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2007.

[6] B. Ghai, A. Sharma, and S. Akhtar, "Comparative evaluation of intraocular pressure changes subsequent to insertion of laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal tube," Journal of Postgraduate Medicine, vol. 47, no. 3, p. 181, 2001.

[7] J. Igboko, I. Desalu, F. Akinsola, and O. Kushimo, "Intraocular pressure changes in a Nigerian population--effects of tracheal tube and laryngeal mask airway insertion and removal," The Nigerian Postgraduate Medical Journal, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 99-104, 2009.

[8] M. Gulati, M. Mohta, S. Ahuja, and V. P. Gupta, "Comparison of laryngeal mask airway with tracheal tube for ophthalmic surgery in paediatric patients," Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 383-389, 2004.

[9] L. Bouvet, X. Da-Col, T. Rimmele, B. Allaouchiche, D. Chassard, and E. Boselli, "Optimal remifentanil dose for laryngeal mask airway insertion when co-administered with a single standard dose of propofol," Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal Canadien D'anesthesie, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 222-229, 2010.

[10] W. J. Jeon, K. H. Kim, J. K. Suh, and S. Y. Cho, "The use of remifentanil to facilitate the insertion of the Cobra perilaryngeal airway," Anesthesia & Analgesia, vol. 108, no. 5, pp. 1505-1509, 2009.

[11] A. M. Whitford, S. W. Hone, B. O'hare, J. Magner, and P. Eustace, "Intra-ocular pressure changes following laryngeal mask airway insertion: a comparative study," Anaesthesia, vol. 52, no. 8, pp. 794-796, 1997.

[12] M. Ziyaeifard, R. Azarfarin, and G. Massoumi, "A comparison of intraocular pressure and hemodynamic responses to insertion of laryngeal mask airway or endotracheal tube using anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil in cataract surgery," Journal of Research in Medical Sciences: The Official Journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, vol. 17, no. 17, pp. 503-507, 2012.

[13] T. M. Akhtar, P. McMurray, W. J. Kerr, and G. N. C. Kenny, "A comparison of laryngeal mask airway with tracheal tube for intra-ocular ophthalmic surgery," Anaesthesia, vol. 47, no. 8, pp. 668-671, 1992.

[14] H. K. Eltzschig, R. Darsow, T. H. Schroeder, H. Hettesheimer, and H. Guggenberger, "Effect of tracheal intubation or laryngeal mask airway insertion on intraocular pressure using balanced anesthesia with sevoflurane and remifentanil," Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 264-267, 2001.

[15] T. Abulu, Assessment of Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion Conditions, With Co-Administration Of Thiopentone, Fentanyl And Halothane, AAU, Anand, Gujarat, 2015.

[16] J. E. Wynands and D. E. Crowell, "Intraocular tension in association with succinylcholine and endotracheal intubation: a preliminary report," Canadian Anaesthetists' Society Journal, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 39-43, 1960.

[17] J. Badheka, R. Jadliwala, V. Chhaya, V. Parmar, A. Vasani, and A. Rajyaguru, "I-gel as an alternative to endotracheal tube in adult laparoscopic surgeries: a comparative study," Journal of Minimal Access Surgery, vol. 11, no. 4, p. 251, 2015.

[18] K. Lamb, M. F. M. James, and P. K. Janicki, "The laryngeal mask airway for intraocular surgery: effects on intraocular pressure and stress responses," British Journal of Anaesthesia, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 143-147, 1992.

[19] C. Keller and J. Brimacombe, "Mucosal pressure and oropharyngeal leak pressure with the ProSeal versus laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized paralysed patients," British Journal of Anaesthesia, vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 262-266, 2000.

[20] W. Oczenski, H. Krenn, A. A. Dahaba et al., "Hemodynamic and catecholamine stress responses to insertion of the combitube[registered sign], laryngeal mask airway or tracheal intubation," Anesthesia & Analgesia, vol. 88, no. 6, pp. 1389-1394, 1999.

[21] A. N. Shetty, V. Shinde, and L. Chaudhari, "A comparative study of various airway devices as regards ease of insertion and haemodynamic responses," Indian Journal of Anaesthesia, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 134-137, 2004.

[22] M. H. Eghbal and M. A. Sahmeddini, "Comparison larygeal mask airway with the endotracheal tube for the external dacryocystorhionostomy surgery. A randomized clinical trial," Middle East Journal of Anaesthesiology, vol. 22, no. 22, pp. 283-288, 2013.

[23] T. Asai and S. Morris, "The laryngeal mask airway: its features, effects and role," Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia, vol. 41, no. 10, pp. 930-960, 1994.

[24] J. E. Mandel, "Laryngeal mask airways in ear, nose, and throat procedures," Anesthesiology Clinics, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 469-483, 2010.

[25] D. R. Derbyshire, A. Chmielewski, D. Fell, M. Vater, K. Achola, and G. Smith, "Plasma catecholamine responses to tracheal intubation," British Journal of Anaesthesia, vol. 55, no. 9, pp. 855-860, 1983.

[26] K. Shah, "ProSeal laryngeal mask airway as an alternative to standard endotracheal tube in securing upper airway in the patients undergoing beating-heart coronary artery bypass grafting," Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 61, 2017.

[27] S. Takahashi, T. Mizutani, M. Miyabe, and H. Toyooka, "Hemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation with laryngoscope versus lightwand intubating device (trachlight) in adults with normal airway," Anesthesia & Analgesia, vol. 95, no. 2, pp. 480-484, 2002.

[28] K. J. Khalid, Comparison of Haemodynamic Responses to Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion and Laryngoscopy with Endotracheal Intubation in Adults Undergoing Elective Surgery at Muhimbili, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, 2012.

[29] M. J. L. Bucx, R. T. M. GEEL, P. A. E. Scheck, and T. Stijnen, "Cardiovascular effects of forces applied during laryngoscopy," Anaesthesia, vol. 47, no. 12, pp. 1029-1033, 1992.

Mohammed Suleiman Obsa [ID], (1) Azeb Lencha Sholla, (2) Betelhem Girma Baraki, (2) Getahun Dendir Welde [ID], (1) Temesgen Bati Gelgelu, (3) and Melese Meleku Kuruche (4)

(1) Wolaita Sodo University, Anesthesia Department, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia

(2) Addis Ababa University, Anesthesia Department, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

(3) Wolaita Sodo University, School of Public Health, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia

(4) Wolaita Sodo University, School of Nursing, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia

Correspondence should be addressed to Mohammed Suleiman Obsa;

Received 19 February 2020; Accepted 16 March 2020; Published 1 June 2020

Academic Editor: Davide Cattano
TABLE 1: Socio-demographic characteristics of study subjects.

Group   Number      Age in years           Weight (kgs)
                  mean [+ or -] SD       mean [+ or -] SD

LMA       42     6.45 [+ or -] 3.217   20.90 [+ or -] 6.435
ETT       42     6.57 [+ or -] 3.013   23.48 [+ or -] 15.810

Group             Sex                       ASA

           Male        Female       ASA I       ASA II

LMA     20 (47.6%)   22 (52.4%)   38 (90.5%)   4 (9.5%)
ETT      21 (50%)     21 (50%)    40 (95.2%)   2 (4.8%)

Table 2: The mean heart rate among ETT and LMA of study subjects.

Heart rate         ETT mean [+ or -] SD    p value for difference
                                              within ETT group

Baseline HR       113.55 [+ or -] 25.885             --
After insertion   143.18 [+ or -] 26.368            0.000
At 1 min.         142.24 [+ or -] 25.236            0.000
At 3 min.         139.24 [+ or -] 25.324            0.000
At 5 min.         112.86 [+ or -] 24.467           0. 328

Heart rate                 LMA               p value for
                     Mean [+ or -] SD         difference
                                           within LMA group

Baseline HR       116.86 [+ or -] 26.276          --
After insertion   132.34 [+ or -] 26.453        0.000
At 1 min.         130.78 [+ or -] 25.342        0.000
At 3 min.         115.64 [+ or -] 22.158        0.156
At 5 min.         110.43 [+ or -] 18.948        1.238

Heart rate           p value for
                  difference between
                  ETT and LMA groups

Baseline HR             0.546
After insertion         0.003
At 1 min.               0.001
At 3 min.               0.316
At 5 min.               0.627

TABLE 3: Mean systolic blood pressure among ETT and LMA
of study subjects.

Systolic blood     ETT mean [+ or -] SD      p value for
pressure                                      difference
                                           within ETT group

Baseline SBP      109.67 [+ or -] 19.034          --
After insertion   132.58 [+ or -] 23.863        0.000
At 1 min.         131.68 [+ or -] 24.376        0.000
At 3 min.         125.45 [+ or -] 22.862        0.468
At 5 min.         109.15 [+ or -] 17.186        0.124

Systolic blood             LMA               p value for
pressure             Mean [+ or -] SD         difference
                                           within LMA group

Baseline SBP      110.95 [+ or -] 13.458          --
After insertion   122.42 [+ or -] 14.165        0.000
At 1 min.         122.85 [+ or -] 13.254        0.002
At 3 min.         115.12 [+ or -] 12.247        0.078
At 5 min.         109.64 [+ or -] 12.125        0.146

Systolic blood       p value for
pressure          difference between
                  ETT and LMA groups

Baseline SBP            0.328
After insertion         0.004
At 1 min.               0.336
At 3 min.               0.439
At 5 min.               0.303

TABLE 4: Mean diastolic blood pressure among ETT and LMA of
study subjects.

Diastolic blood            ETT            p value for difference
pressure            mean [+ or -] SD         within ETT group

Baseline DBP      73.45 [+ or -] 14.492             --
After insertion   84.32 [+ or -] 15.860            0.000
At 1 min.         85.27 [+ or -] 16.103            0.000
At 3 min.         73.85 [+ or -] 13.628            0.003
At 5 min.         70.44 [+ or -] 12.182            0.274

Diastolic blood         LMA          p value difference
pressure          Mean [+ or -] SD    within LMA group

Baseline DBP       72.31 + 11.104            --
After insertion    78.16 + 15.134           0.000
At 1 min.          74.28 + 14.176           0.000
At 3 min.          72.25 + 10.173           0.143
At 5 min.          69.35 + 10.114           0.154

Diastolic blood      p value for
pressure          difference between
                  ETT and LMA groups

Baseline DBP            0.532
After insertion         0.002
At 1 min.               0.213
At 3 min.               0.219
At 5 min.               0.623

TABLE 5: Mean arterial blood pressure among ETT and LMA
of study subjects.

MAP                ETT mean [+ or -] SD        p value
                                            for difference
                                           within ETT group

Baseline MAP       91.79 [+ or -] 14.851          --
After insertion   115.14 [+ or -] 17.213        0.000
At 1 min.         112.34 [+ or -] 16.947        0.000
At 3 min.          98.48 [+ or -] 16.153        0.007
At 5 min.          89.58 [+ or -] 14.143        0.454

MAP                        LMA                 p value
                     Mean [+ or -] SD       for difference
                                           within LMA group

Baseline MAP       86.38 [+ or -] 12.253          --
After insertion   106.64 [+ or -] 18.135        0.000
At 1 min.         100.84 [+ or -] 18.214        0.006
At 3 min.          85.78 [+ or -] 10.378        0.035
At 5 min.          84.14 [+ or -] 10.211        0.113

MAP                   p value for
                  difference between
                  ETT and LMA groups

Baseline MAP             0.015
After insertion          0.001
At 1 min.                0.416
At 3 min.                0.115
At 5 min.                0.237
COPYRIGHT 2020 Hindawi Limited
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2020 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Research Article
Author:Obsa, Mohammed Suleiman; Sholla, Azeb Lencha; Baraki, Betelhem Girma; Welde, Getahun Dendir; Gelgelu
Publication:Anesthesiology Research and Practice
Article Type:Clinical report
Geographic Code:6ETHI
Date:Jun 30, 2020
Previous Article:Comparison of the Effects of Desflurane, Sevoflurane, and Propofol on the Glottic Opening Area during Remifentanil-Based General Anesthesia Using a...
Next Article:High Incidence of Burst Suppression during Propofol Sedation for Outpatient Colonoscopy: Lessons Learned from Neuromonitoring.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2021 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters |