{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022026431718061675, 'fraction_numerical': 0.025330396475770924, 'mean_word_length': 4.509090909090909, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Pro‐Seal laryngeal mask airway

We were interested in recent correspondence relating to reflux of gastric contents into the drain tube of the Pro‐Seal laryngeal mask airway (Dalgleish & Dolgner. Anaesthesia 2001; 56: 1010). As part of a trial comparing performance of the Pro‐Seal with the classic laryngeal mask airway we inserted a gastric tube into the drain tube of 30 Pro‐Seal laryngeal mask airways in elective surgery patients. All patients were starved for 6 h for solids and 3 h for fluids. In all cases, fibre‐optic examination of the drain tube and the oesophagus below was undertaken before passage of the gastric tube. On no occasion was gastric content seen in the drain tube or in the upper oesophagus. Gastric fluid was aspirated in 29 of 30 cases with a median volume of 22 ml and a range of 0–85 ml. In none of the cases was there any suggestion of clinical regurgitation or aspiration.