TY - JOUR
AU - Brain, A. I. J.
AB - LE’ITERS TO THE EDITOR 199 ANESTH ANALC 1994;79192-9 On the ”Curare Cleft” Autoclaving Laryngeal Masks To the Editor: To the Editor: The letter from Dr. Biro (Anesth Analg 1993;771079) concern- In their letter, Bissinger and Lenz (1) present a useful re- minder that the sensitivity of the diaphragm to muscle re- ing damage to laryngeal masks (LMAs) during autoclaving laxant drugs differs from that of other muscles, e.g., the ad- contains a number of statements that should be clarified. ductor pollicis. May I offer a gentle comment on the The LMAis not designed to withstand 200 autoclave cycles. unfortunate term ”curare cleft,” which the authors used (with The UK manufacturers of the device warrant it for 40 uses, proper reference to the source of that term) to describe the but, as with any reusable device, careful performance of the appearance of the capnogram when a weakened patient at- recommended preuse checks is the only reliable means of tempts to inhale during controlled ventilation. The term ”cu- ensuring that it is safe to use, irrespective of the number of rare cleft” draws attention to the administration of additional reuses. doses of a muscle relaxant drug that would abolish the cleft. 
TI - Autoclaving Laryngeal Masks To the Editor
JO - Anesthesia & Analgesia
DA - 1994-07-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/wolters-kluwer-health/autoclaving-laryngeal-masks-to-the-editor-HH5u69gUT2
SP - 199
EP - 199
VL - 79
IS - 1
DP - DeepDyve
ER -