Page 98 - JSOM Summer 2018

II and the LMA-ProSeal for elective surgical interventions. Acta 31. Russi CS, Hartley MJ, Buresh CJ. A pilot study of the King LT su-
Anaesthesiol Scand. 2007;51:1373–1377. pralaryngeal airway use in a rural Iowa EMS system. Int J Emerg
28. Mihai R, Knottenbelt G, Cook TM. Evaluation of the revised la- Med. 2008;1:135–138.
ryngeal tube suction: the laryngeal tube suction II in 100 patients. 32. Schalk R, Engel S, Meininger D, et al. Disposable laryngeal tube
Br J Anaesth. 2007;99:734–739. suction: Standard insertion technique versus two modified inser-
29. Gaitini LA, Vaida SJ, Somri M, et al. A randomized controlled tion techniques for patients with a simulated difficult airway. Re-
trial comparing the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway with the la- suscitation. 2011;82:199–202.
ryngeal tube suction in mechanically ventilated patients. Anesthe- 33. Gaither JB, Matheson J, Eberhardt A, et al. Tongue engorgement
siology. 2004;101:316–320. associated with prolonged use of the King-LT laryngeal tube de-
30. Henlin T, Sotak M, Kovaricek P, et al. Comparison of five vice. Ann Emerg Med. 2010;55:4.
2nd-generation supraglottic airway devices for airway manage-
ment performed by novice military operators. Biomed Res Int.
2015;2015:201898.

THE NEW CHOICE
FOR IO VASCULAR ACCESS

› No drill › No batteries › No extra parts

› Vascular access in under 10 seconds

› Safe › Automatic › Disposable › Low cost

www.ps-med.com › 713.723.6000 › Life Saving Innovations

96 | JSOM Volume 18, Edition 2/Summer 2018