Pressure support ventilation with the ProSeal® laryngeal mask airway.: A comparison of sevoflurane, isoflurane and propofol

Background and objective: There are no data about the influence of anaesthetics on cardiovascular variables during pressure support ventilation of the lungs through the laryngeal mask airway. We compared propofol, sevoflurane and isoflurane for maintenance of anaesthesia with the ProSeal (R) laryngeal mask airway during pressure support ventilation. Methods: Sixty healthy adults undergoing peripheral musculo-skeletal surgery were randomized for maintenance with sevoflurane end-tidal 29%, isoflurane end-tidal 1.1% or propofol 6 mg kg(-1) h(-1) in oxygen 33% and air. Pressure support ventilation comprised positive end-expiratory pressure set at 5 cmH(2)O, and pressure support set 5 cmH(2)O above positive end-expiratory pressure. Pressure support was initiated when inspiration produced a 2 cmH(2)O reduction in airway pressure. A blinded observer recorded cardiorespiratory variables (heart rate, mean blood pressure, oxygen saturation, air-way occlusion pressure, respiratory rate, expired tidal volume, expired minute volume and end-tidal CO2), adverse events and emergence times. Results: Respiratory rate and minute volume were 10-21% lower, and end-tidal CO2 6-11% higher with the propofol group compared with the sevoflurane or isoflurane groups, but otherwise cardiorespiratory variables were similar among groups. No adverse events occurred in any group. Emergence times were longer with the propofol group compared with the sevoflurane or isoflurane groups (10 vs. 7 vs. 7 min). Conclusion: Lung ventilation is less effective and emergence times are longer with propofol than sevoflurane or isoflurane for maintenance of anaesthesia during pressure support ventilation with the ProSeal (R) laryngeal mask airway. However, these differences are small and of doubtful clinical importance.