LIMITS OF LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY IN PATIENTS AFTER CERVICAL OR ORAL RADIOTHERAPY

Purpose: To test the efficacy of the LMA in patients with previous ora l or cervical radiotherapy, without upper airway obstruction, Methods: in nine patients after oral or cervical radiotherapy, efficiency of v entilation was assessed after induction of general anaesthesia and IMA insertion, Fibreoptic examination through the tube was performed to c heck the position of LMA Results: In patients who had had oral radioth erapy, all five had limited mouth opening and in two, LMA insertion wa s difficult but permitted good ventilation, in the four patients who h ad had cervical radiotherapy, LMA insertion was easy but, in two, the lungs were difficult to ventilate and, in two, the lungs could not be ventilated and orotracheal intubation was required. Conclusion: in pat ients with limitation of mouth opening after oral radiotherapy, LMA ma y represent an alternative to tracheal intubation, In patient with cer vical sclerosis after radiotherapy; the use of LMA should be avoided.