Ease Of Insertion Research Articles

Comparison of Arndt-endobronchial blocker plus laryngeal mask airway with left-sided double-lumen endobronchial tube in one-lung ventilation in thoracic surgery in the morbidly obese.

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and performance of Arndt-endobronchial blocker (Arndt) combined with laryngeal mask airway (LMA) compared with left-sided double-lumen endobronchial tube (L-DLT) in morbidly obese patients in one-lung ventilation (OLV). In a prospective, randomized double-blind controlled clinical trial, 80 morbidly obese patients (ASA I-III, aged 20–70) undergoing general anesthesia for elective thoracic surgeries were randomly allocated into groups Arndt (n=40) and L-DLT (n=40). In group Arndt, a LMA™ Proseal was placed followed by an Arndt-endobronchial blocker. In group L-DLT, patients were intubated with a left-sided double-lumen endotracheal tube. Primary endpoints were the airway establishment, ease of insertion, oxygenation, lung collapse and surgical field exposure. Results showed similar ease of airway establishment and tube/device insertion between the two groups. Oxygen arterial pressure (PaO2) of patients in the Arndt group was significantly higher than L-DLT (154±46 vs 105±52 mmHg; P<0.05). Quality of lung collapse and surgical field exposure in the Arndt group was significantly better than L-DLT (effective rate 100 vs 90%; P<0.05). Duration of surgery and anesthesia were significantly shorter in the Arndt group (2.4±1.7 vs 3.1±1.8 and 2.8±1.9 vs 3.8±1.8 h, respectively; P<0.05). Incidence of hoarseness of voice and incidence and severity of throat pain at the post-anesthesia care unit and 12, 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery were significantly lower in the Arndt group (P<0.05). Findings suggested that Arndt-endobronchial blocker combined with LMA can serve as a promising alternative for morbidly obese patients in OLV in thoracic surgery.

A comparison of metal introducer and bougie-guided techniques of insertion PLMATM with respect to cuff position and air leak

Background: Drain tube is an integral part of proseal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA). It can lodge a sleek device such as bougie which can act as a guiding tool to advance and position the cuff. As an alternative to metal introducer tool (MIT), we compared the two techniques for ease of insertion score, various cuff positions and air leak encountered during insertion of PLMA under nonparalysed situation. Materials and Methods: Sixty anesthetized patients were divided into two groups using computer-based randomization. PLMA was inserted into either MIT or adult introducer bougie. The primary outcome was ease of insertion (Score 1–4), cuff positions defined by suprasternal notch test, gel displacement test, gastric tube passage test and air leak. Airway pressure, seal pressure, and complications encountered were the secondary outcome. Independent t-test, Fisher's exact test, and Chi-square test were used to analyze the data. P

Comparing the Ease of Insertion and Haemodynamic Changes of Laryngeal Mask Airway and Combitube in Patients Undergoing General Anaesthesia

Comparing the Ease of Insertion and Haemodynamic Changes of Laryngeal Mask Airway and Combitube in Patients Undergoing General Anaesthesia

Comparison of two methods of gum elastic bougie aided endotracheal intubation using Airtraq® video laryngoscope

This study was conducted to compare two methods of gum elastic bougie (GEB) aided endotracheal intubation using Airtraq ® video laryngoscope . Materials and method : In this prospective study, sixty patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia were randomly allocated into two groups. In Group P, Airtraq ® was preloaded with endotracheal tube (ETT) with the GEB placed inside it up to the tip and the entire assembly is passed en bloc into the mouth. On visualisation of the glottis, the GEB is initially advanced across the glottis followed by railroading the ETT into the trachea. In Group S, GEB was introduced separately from the side after visualisation of the glottis using Airtraq ® , followed by railroading the ETT over the GEB. Time taken for successful insertion of GEB, ease of insertion of GEB, time taken and number of attempts at endotracheal intubation were noted. Results : As the data for time taken for GEB insertion were skewed, the statistical analysis was done using Mann-Whitney U test and median, 25 th and 75 th percentile values were calculated. Time taken for GEB insertion and endotracheal intubation was found to be shorter in Group P than in Group S, both the results being statistically significant. The time taken for GEB insertion was 7.71 seconds (median) in Group P and 20.44 seconds (median) in Group S, whereas time taken for endotracheal intubation was 14.68 ± 0.913 seconds vs. 29.10 ± 1.83 in Group P and Group S respectively. Conclusion : The use of GEB preloaded into the ETT or insertion of the same from the side of the mouth while using Airtraq ® proves to be a clinically effective alternative to achieve successful endotracheal intubation. Time taken to achieve successful endotracheal intubation is shorter if the GEB is preloaded into the endotracheal tube. Additional manoeuvres like external laryngeal manipulation will help in GEB advancement especially when it is inserted from the side of the mouth using Airtraq ®

Efficacy of a new dual channel laryngeal mask airway, the LMA®Gastro™ Airway, for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a prospective observational study

BackgroundSignificant cardiorespiratory events are frequent in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Central to the occurrence of respiratory events is an unsecured airway. This study sought to determine the efficacy of a new laryngeal mask airway, the LMA®GastroTM Airway (Teleflex Medical, Athlone, Ireland), in patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. New design features include a dedicated channel for oesophageal intubation and separate channel with terminal cuff for lung ventilation. MethodsIn a prospective, open label, observational study, 292 ASA physical status classification 1 and 2 patients at low risk of pulmonary aspiration undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy received i.v. propofol anaesthesia and standardized insertion of the LMA®GastroTM Airway. Endoscopy outcomes included insertion success, first attempt success, and ease of endoscope insertion. LMA®GastroTM Airway outcomes included insertion success, first attempt success, ease of insertion, lowest oxygen saturation, airway compromise, laryngospasm, bloodstained device, and sore throat. ResultsPer protocol analysis (n=290), the endoscopy success rate amongst the cohort with successful LMA®GastroTM Airway insertion was 99% [95% confidence interval (CI): 98, 100]. LMA®GastroTM Airway insertion success rate (n=292) was 99% (95% CI: 98, 100). For endoscopy and LMA®GastroTM Airway insertion success, the lower limit of the 95% CIs was at least 98%, indicating LMA®GastroTM Airway efficacy. Median (inter-quartile range) lowest intraoperative oxygen saturation was 98% (98, 99). Only one serious adverse event occurred (re-admission for sore throat and inability to tolerate fluids) and was reported to the Tasmanian Health and Medical Human Research Ethics Committee. ConclusionsThe LMA®GastroTM Airway appears effective for clinical use in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Clinical trial registrationACTRN12616001464459.

Clinical Comparison of I-Gel Supraglottic Airway Device and Cuffed Endotracheal Tube for Pressure-Controlled Ventilation During Routine Surgical Procedures.

Recently, there has been a trend favouring the use of supraglottic airway devices over endotracheal tubes (ETT) during short surgical procedures. In this study, we are going to assess the suitability of one such supraglottic airway device, i-gel, for pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) during routine surgical procedures. The airway management for 60 patients was done with either i-gel (Group I) or cuffed tracheal tube (Group E) for this prospective, randomised, double-blinded study. Insertion time, number of attempts, ease of insertion and haemodynamic monitoring were recorded before, during and after insertion of these devices. Airway leak tests, leak volume and leak fraction were measured at 15, 20 and 25 cm H2O PCV, and pharyngolaryngeal morbidity was evaluated postoperatively. I-gel is easier to insert than a tracheal tube (p=0.0056). The increase in heart rate and MAP was higher following insertion of tracheal tube in the first few minutes (p<0.001) and subsequently became comparable between the two groups. The leak volume and leak fraction between the two groups were comparable at 15 cm H2O PCV, but significant difference was seen at 20 and 25 H2O PCV between the two groups (p=0.232, p<0.001, p<0.001). Thirty minutes later, the leak volume and leak fraction between groups were comparable at 15 cm H2O PCV (p=0.495, p=0.104) but not at 20 and 25 H2O PCV (p<0.001, p<0.001). Pharyngolaryngeal morbidity was significantly lesser in the i-gel group. I-gel provides a reasonable alternative to cuffed ETT for pressure-controlled ventilation provided the pressures can be limited to 15 to 20 cm H2O.

Comparison of the Supreme\u2122 and ProSeal\u2122 laryngeal mask airways in infants: a prospective randomised clinical study

BackgroundThe Supreme™ and ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airways (LMAs) are widely used in paediatric anaesthesia; however, LMA use in infants is limited because many anaesthesiologists prefer to use tracheal intubation in infants.In this study, we compared the Supreme and ProSeal LMAs in infants by measuring their performance characteristics, including insertion features, ventilation parameters, induced changes in haemodynamics and rates of postoperative complications.MethodsInfants of ASA physical status I scheduled for elective, minor, lower abdominal surgery were divided into two groups: the Supreme LMA group and the ProSeal LMA group. Times and ease of LMA insertion were noted. The percentages of tidal volume leakage as well as peak, mean and leakage pressures for all infants were measured. Heart rate (HR), oxygen saturation (SpO2) and end tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2) values were recorded before and after LMA insertion and before and after extubation. After extubation, complications and adverse effects were noted.ResultsDemographic and surgical data were similar between the two groups. LMA insertion times were shorter for the ProSeal group than for the Supreme group (P < 0.002). The mean HR value for the ProSeal group was lower than for the Supreme group (P < 0.011). Both the peak pressure and the leakage percentage for the ProSeal group were statistically lower than for the Supreme group. The leakage pressure for the ProSeal group was statistically higher than for the Supreme group (P < 0.001).ConclusionsThe ProSeal LMA is superior to the Supreme LMA for use in infants due to the ease of insertion, high oropharyngeal leakage pressure and fewer induced changes in haemodynamics.Trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03251105, retrospectively registered on 15 Aug 2017.

Sore throat following three adult supraglottic airway devices: A randomised controlled trial.

Sore throat is a common complaint after surgery. It affects patient satisfaction and can affect activity after discharge. The supraglottic airway device (SAD) offers an alternative to traditional tracheal intubation with potential benefit in preventing sore throat. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of sore throat following three different SADs, the laryngeal mask airway Unique (LMA-U) and the more recent LMA Supreme (LMA-S) and the I-gel. A randomised single-blind controlled three parallel-group trial. University Hospital of Nîmes, Division of Anaesthesia Intensive Care Pain and Emergency, Nîmes, France, from April 2009 to September 2012. A total of 546 patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery of less than 2 h under general anaesthesia were randomly allocated to receive the LMA-U, the LMA-S or the I-gel. Anaesthesia was induced with propofol and sufentanil and maintained with propofol or with sevoflurane in air-oxygen. After airway device insertion, intra-cuff pressure was adjusted to less than 60 mmHg (LMA-U, LMA-S) and pressure-controlled ventilation initiated. The primary study endpoint was to compare incidence of sore throat 24 h postoperatively (H+24) following placement of the LMA-U, LMA-S and the I-gel. Secondary endpoints were clinical performance (airway leak pressure, dynamic airway compliance, complications during maintenance), ease of use (device insertion time, success on first attempt, ease of insertion and removal) and other adverse events (neck or jaw pain, dysphonia, dysphagia, nausea and vomiting). The authors analysed 177, 174 and 173 patients who received LMA-U, the LMA-S and the I-gel, respectively. The primary endpoint was assessed in 436 patients. In total, 104 patients (23.9%) patients reported a H+24 sore throat, with no difference between groups (P = 0.34). H+24 dysphagia with liquids was higher (P = 0.0065) with the LMA-S (12.1%) compared with LMA-U (5.3%) and I-gel (2.9%). Airway leak pressure (cmH2O) was lower (P < 0.0001) with LMA-U [21 (18 to 27)] compared with I-gel [26 (20 to 30)] and LMA-S [25 (21 to 30)]. Device insertion time (sec) was shorter (P < 0.0167) with the I-gel [30 (20 to 40)] compared with the LMA-U [34 (23 to 48)] and LMA-S [32 (22 to 50)]. The incidence of postoperative sore throat was not significantly different between the three SADs studied.

Lumboperitoneal shunt insertion without fluoroscopy guidance: Accuracy of placement in a series of 107 procedures

Background: Lumboperitoneal (LP) shunts were the mainstay of cerebrospinal fluid diversion therapy for idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). The traditionally cited advantage of LP shunts over ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts is the ease of insertion in IIH. This needs to be placed at the level of L3/4 to be below the level of the spinal cord. The objective of this study was to analyse the position of LP shunts inserted without portable fluoroscopy guidance. Methods: A retrospective analysis of radiology was performed for patients who underwent lumboperitoneal shunts between 2006 and 2016 at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery. Patients who had insertion of a LP shunt without fluoroscopy guidance were selected. Patients without post-procedural imaging were excluded. A retrospective analysis of the clinical notes was also performed. Results: Between 2006 and 2016, 163 lumboperitoneal shunts were inserted in 105 patients. A total of 56 cases were excluded due to lack of post-procedural imaging; therefore, 107 post-procedural x-rays were reviewed. In 17 (15.8%) cases the proximal end of the LP shunt was placed at L1/L2 level or above. Conclusions: Insertion of LP shunts without portable fluoroscopy guidance gives a 15.8% risk of incorrect positioning of the proximal end of the catheter. We suggest that x-ray is recommended to avoid incorrect level placement. Further investigation could be carried out with a control group with fluoroscopy against patients without.

Lumboperitoneal shunt insertion without fluoroscopy guidance: Accuracy of placement in a series of 107 procedures

Background: Lumboperitoneal (LP) shunts were the mainstay of cerebrospinal fluid diversion therapy for idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). The traditionally cited advantage of LP shunts over ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts is the ease of insertion in IIH. This needs to be placed at the level of L3/4 to be below the level of the spinal cord. The objective of this study was to analyse the position of LP shunts inserted without portable fluoroscopy guidance. Methods: A retrospective analysis of radiology was performed for patients who underwent lumboperitoneal shunts between 2006 and 2016 at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery. Patients who had insertion of a LP shunt without fluoroscopy guidance were selected. Patients without post-procedural imaging were excluded. A retrospective analysis of the clinical notes was also performed. Results: Between 2006 and 2016, 163 lumboperitoneal shunts were inserted in 105 patients. A total of 56 cases were excluded due to lack of post-procedural imaging; therefore, 107 post-procedural x-rays were reviewed. In 17 (15.8%) cases the proximal end of the LP shunt was placed at L1/L2 level or above. Conclusions: Insertion of LP shunts without portable fluoroscopy guidance gives a 15.8% risk of incorrect positioning of the proximal end of the catheter. We suggest that x-ray is recommended to avoid incorrect level placement. Further investigation could be carried out with a control group with fluoroscopy against patients without.

Lumboperitoneal shunt insertion without fluoroscopy guidance: Accuracy of placement in a series of 107 procedures.

Background: Lumboperitoneal (LP) shunts were the mainstay of cerebrospinal fluid diversion therapy for idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). The traditionally cited advantage of LP shunts over ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts is the ease of insertion in IIH. This needs to be placed at the level of L3/4 to be below the level of the spinal cord. The objective of this study was to analyse the position of LP shunts inserted without portable fluoroscopy guidance. Methods: A retrospective analysis of radiology was performed for patients who underwent lumboperitoneal shunts between 2006 and 2016 at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery. Patients who had insertion of a LP shunt without fluoroscopy guidance were selected. Patients without post-procedural imaging were excluded. A retrospective analysis of the clinical notes was also performed. Results:Between 2006 and 2016, 163 lumboperitoneal shunts were inserted in 105 patients. A total of 56 cases were excluded due to lack of post-procedural imaging; therefore, 107 post-procedural x-rays were reviewed. In 17 (15.8%) cases the proximal end of the LP shunt was placed at L1/L2 level or above. Conclusions:Insertion of LP shunts without portable fluoroscopy guidance gives a 15.8% risk of incorrect positioning of the proximal end of the catheter. We suggest that x-ray is recommended to avoid incorrect level placement. Further investigation could be carried out with a control group with fluoroscopy against patients without.

Introducing the \u201cBone-Screw-Fastener\u201d for improved screw fixation in orthopedic surgery: a revolutionary paradigm shift?

BackgroundConventional screws used for fracture fixation in orthopedic surgery continue to rely on the historic buttress thread design. While buttress screws generally provide solid resistance against unidirectional axial loading forces, their design suffers from several limitations, as the buttress thread does not adequately resist multiaxial forces. Furthermore, the buttress screw is prone to stripping at the bone-screw interface and can cause microfracturing of the surrounding bone due to its thread design. Standard buttress screws are therefore at risk of adverse postoperative outcomes secondary to failure of bone fixation. A new patented Bone-Screw-Fastener was recently designed that is based on an interlocking thread technology. This new fastener provides distributive forces from the threads onto the bone and therefore resists loads in multiple directions. The underlying concept is represented by a “female thread” bone cutting technology designed to maximize bone volume, preserve bone architecture, and create a circumferential interlocking interface between the implant and bone that protects the thread from stripping and from failing to multiaxial forces.Presentation of the hypothesisWe hypothesize that the new Bone-Screw-Fastener overcomes the classic shortcomings of conventional orthopedic screws with buttress threads by ease of insertion, improved bone preservation, increased resistance to off-axis multidirectional loading forces and to stripping of the threads. These advanced biomechanical and biological properties can potentially mitigate the classic limitations of conventional buttress screws by providing better resistance to implant failure under physiological loads, preserving bone biology, and thus potentially improving patient outcomes in the future.Testing the hypothesisThe presumed superiority of the new fastener will require testing and validation in well-designed prospective multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs), using the conventional buttress screw as control.Implications of the hypothesisOnce validated in multicenter RCTs, the new Bone-Screw-Fastener may drive a change in paradigm with regard to its innovative biomechanical principles and biologic bone preservation for surgical applications requiring screw fixation.

Paediatric lung isolation

### Key points Lung isolation is required for a wide variety of pathology in paediatric patients. The varying size of the paediatric airway and size limitations of each lung isolation device poses a challenge to paediatric anaesthesiologists. The need for lung isolation includes: the prevention of contamination of one lung from the other due to haemorrhage or infection, the need to control the distribution of ventilation secondary to a bronchopulmonary fistula, a lung cyst or bullae, or severe hypoxaemia from unilateral lung disease. Extensive bronchopulmonary lavage may also necessitate lung isolation. Although lung isolation can assist in surgical exposure, in the paediatric population, surgical exposure for lung resections, mediastinal exposure, and thorascopy can often be accomplished by the CO2 pneumothorax and retraction of the operative lung without the need for lung isolation. This is most common in the young patient (<2 yr of age). Slinger1 teaches that there are the ‘ABCs’ of adult lung isolation: anatomy, bronchoscopy, and chest imaging. In paediatric lung isolation, there are still all the same ‘ABC’ considerations, with the addition of ‘D’—the varying diameter of the paediatric airway with age. ### Anatomy It has been long established that there are differences between the paediatric …

Comparative Study of Intubation Performance between Macintosh, the Channeled King Vision and the C-MAC D-Blade Videolaryngoscope in Controlled Hypertensive Patients

Background: The common cause of anesthesia related injury is inability to intubate the trachea. Video laryngoscopes present an enlarged video image of glottis while intubating the trachea. The aim of this study is to compare efficacy of intubation by Macintosh with C-MAC D-Blade and King Vision video laryngoscope (VL) in controlled hypertensive patients. Patients and methods: 105 ASA II T2: just before intubation; T3: 2 min after intubation; T4: 5 min after intubation. Primary outcome: time and number of attempts required to successful intubation. Secondary outcomes: ease of laryngoscope insertion, Quality of view, Assist maneuvers, Intubation difficulty, Complications. Results: Differences in heart rate and mean blood pressure between all groups were statistically significant at T3&T4. Differences in duration of successful intubation were statistically significant between group (M) and group(C), also between group (M) and group (K). Statistically significant differences were obtained between all groups regarding quality of view of glottis, ease of insertion of laryngoscope, and use of assist maneuvers for intubation. Conclusion: Video laryngoscopes provide hemodynamic stability and better view of glottis than Macintosh during intubation. King Vision VL has advantages of ease of insertion, less need of assist maneuvers for intubation, with less complication. Thus, it is beneficial to use King Vision for intubation in hypertensive patients.

Effect of Low-dose Atracurium on Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion Conditions: A Randomized Double-blind Clinical Trial.

Background:The amount of sedation and muscle relaxation of the jaw may have an impact on complications caused by laryngeal mask airway (LMA). The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of low-dose Atracurium on conditions of insertion, complications, and hemodynamic responses to LMA insertion following induction of anesthesia with propofol, in patients undergoing cataract surgery.Patients and Methods:In this double-blind randomized clinical trial study, 60 patients were randomly divided into two groups. Initially, the patients in the study group received 0.15 mg/kg intravenous injection of atracurium, and the patients in the control group received 2 ml of intravenous injection of normal saline, after which anesthesia in both groups were induced with midazolam, fentanyl, lidocaine, and propofol. The amount of jaw relaxation, ease of insertion, and the time needed for insertion, hemodynamic responses and complications of LMA insertion were evaluated.Results:Jaw relaxation and ease of LMA insertion in the study group was significantly better than that of the control group (P = 0.02). Average time needed for LMA placement in the study group (5/06 ± 0.52 second) was significantly lower than the control group (5/76 ± 0.67 second) (P = 0.001). Hemodynamic response to LMA insertion was similar in both groups. Sore throat at recovery and 24 h after surgery in the control group was significantly higher than that of the study group (3/30 vs. 10/30) (P = 0.01).Conclusions:Using low doses of atracurium decreases the time needed for LMA insertion and sore throat after the operation. Atracurium also increases jaw relaxation and facilitates the placement of LMA.

Comparative evaluation of Ambu AuraGain™ with ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Background and Aims:Second generation supraglottic airways are increasingly being used in surgical patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Preventing aspiration at higher airway pressures may be at the expense of a higher cuff pressure which can impair mucosal perfusion. We attempted to elucidate whether Ambu AuraGain™ (AAU) would provide a higher oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) with a lower mucosal pressure in comparison to ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway (PLMA).Methods:This was a prospective randomised study involving sixty patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia, using either AAU (Group AAU [n = 30]) or PLMA (Group PLMA [n = 30]) for elective ventilation. Primary outcome measure was the OLP. Number of insertion attempts, ease of insertion, time required for placement and calculated pharyngeal mucosal pressure were the secondary outcome measures. Data were analysed using Student's t-test and Chi-square test.Results:No significant difference in the OLP was noted in both groups. The ease of insertion and success rate at first attempt was similar between the groups. Time taken for insertion in Group AAU was longer than Group PLMA (13.57 ± 1.94 vs. 11.60 ± 2.22 s). The calculated pharyngeal mucosal pressures were lower with Group AAU than Group PLMA for all 3 sizes. The minimum cuff pressure and minimum cuff volume required to prevent leak were found similar in both groups.Conclusion:AAU provides adequate sealing pressures and effective ventilation with lower calculated pharyngeal mucosal pressure, compared to PLMA.

Comparison of the performance of the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway with the LMA–ProSeal in pediatric patients under general anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial

Background Self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway (air-Q SP) is a supraglottic airway device with a noninflatable cuff that does not need continuous monitoring of the cuff pressure. As the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is considered the ‘state-of-the-art’ supraglottic device, we conducted this randomized trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of air-Q SP compared with that of PLMA in pediatric patients. Patients and methods The study included 70 pediatric patients aged from 4 to 15 years undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia who were randomized to either the air-Q SP group or the PLMA group. The primary outcome parameter in this study was the oropharyngeal leak pressure, and the secondary outcome parameters were ease of insertion, time of insertion, first attempt insertion success rate, number of gastric insufflations, fiberoptic glottic view, and complications related to the supraglottic airway device use. Results There was no significant difference between air-Q SP and PLMA regarding first insertion success rate, ease of insertion, oropharyngeal leak pressure, number of gastric insufflations, number of manipulations required to adjust the airway, and complications. Time to insert the air-Q SP was significantly shorter than that of PLMA (13.2±4.2 vs. 17.5±4.8 s, P=0.03). The fiberoptic view was significantly better with air-Q SP than with PLMA (P=0.018). Conclusion The performance of air-Q SP is comparable to that of PLMA as a primary airway device during general anesthesia in pediatric patients, with a shorter insertion time and better fiberoptic view for air-Q SP.

A randomised controlled trial comparing ProSeal laryngeal mask airway, i-gel and Laryngeal Tube Suction-D under general anaesthesia for elective surgical patients requiring controlled ventilation.

Background and Aims:The ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway (PLMA), i-gel™ and Laryngeal Tube Suction-D (LTS-D™) have previously been evaluated alone or in pair-wise comparisons but differing study designs make it difficult to compare the results. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical performance of these three devices in terms of efficacy and safety in patients receiving mechanical ventilation during elective surgical procedures.Methods:This prospective, randomised, double-blind study was conducted on 150 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I–II patients, randomly allocated into 3 groups, undergoing elective surgical procedures under general anaesthesia. PLMA, i-gel™ or LTS-D™ appropriate for weight or/and height was inserted. Primary outcome measured was airway sealing pressure. Insertion time, ease of insertion, number of attempts, overall success rate and the incidence of airway trauma and complications were also recorded. Intergroup differences were compared using one-way analysis of variance with post hoc correction for continuous data and Chi-square test for categorical variables.Results:Overall success rate was comparable between the three devices (i-gel™ 100%, LTS-D™ 94%, PLMA 96%). Airway sealing pressure was lower with i-gel™ (23.38 ± 2.06 cm H2O) compared to LTS-D™ (26.06 ± 2.11 cm H2O) and PLMA (28.5 ± 2.8 cm H2O; P < 0.0005). The mean insertion time was significantly more in PLMA (38.77 ± 3.2 s) compared to i-gel™ (27.9 ± 2.53 s) and LTS-D™ (21.66 ± 2.31 s; P < 0.0005).Conclusion:Airway sealing pressure and insertion time were significantly higher in PLMA compared to i-gel™ and LTS-D™.

The Efficacy Of Non Inflatable Cuff (I-gel and SLIPA) Versus Inflatable Cuff(Soft Seal LMA) Supraglottic Airways In Paralyzed Adult Patients

Aim: To compare the efficacy of non-inflatable cuff supraglottic airways (I-gel and SLIPA) to inflatable cuff soft seal Laryngeal mask airway (SSLMA) in patients requiring general anesthesia and controlled ventilation during elective surgical procedures. Patients and methods: An experimental study design was used, with comparison of three groups of patients using i-gel, SLIPA and SSLMA. Patients with risk of gastro esophageal reflux were excluded. Ease of insertion, quality of seal, effective ventilation, hemodynamic responses, side effects and surgical time were assessed. An Oropharyngeal sealing pressure or ‘leak’ test was performed with the airway devices to quantify the efficacy of the seal with the patient airway. Airway sealing pressure tests claimed to be excellent for clinical purposes. Results: Overall success of insertion was 100% in i-gel, 97.5% and 95% in SSLMA and SLIPA respectively. The i-gel permitted ventilation with a significantly high tidal volume (485 ± 82 ml) at a significantly low peak airway pressure (12 ± 3 cmH2O) and a significantly high leak pressure (26 ± 6.3 cmH2O). All groups show stable hemodynamic responses to insertion and removal of the devices. Insertion time was significantly shorter with i-gel (15 ± 2.5 sec.) compared to SLIPA and SSLMA, 22 ± 4.6 sec. and 19 ± 3.85 sec, respectively. Sore throat was significantly high in SSLMA 30%. Whereas, blood traces on the device and gastric air insufflations were highly significant with SLIPA 8% and 10% respectively. Conclusion: The three disposable SGAs proved to be suitable for controlled ventilation during elective short surgical operations. The i-gel provides effective ventilation with minimal side effects. Whereas, SLIPA is associated with a high incidence of gastric air insufflations, The Soft Seal LMA provides high leakage volume and incidence of sore throat postoperatively.

A Cross-Sectional Study Evaluating the GuardianCPVTM Supraglottic Airway Device in a Clinical Setting

Objective: The GuardianCPVTM is a new second-generation supraglottic airway device (SAD), for which there is currently limited information on efficacy or safety. Our aim is to clarify further the efficacy of the Guardian, and to assess any potential predictors for success or failure of insertion. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional pilot study over a two-month period, recruiting 67 operative cases (33 males; 34 females; weight 81.1 ± 23.0 kg) at the Northern Hospital (TNH), Victoria, Australia, that used the Guardian airway in an elective setting. For each case, the operator of the airway reported, via a voluntary questionnaire, several factors of interest: (1) the overall success rate (primary outcome); (2) ease of insertion; (3) cuff seal pressure (CSP); (4) need for repositioning of the SAD; and (5) patient, airway, operator and technique-related predictors, including past experience with the Guardian (as determined by number of times previously used) and insertion technique. Results: The overall success rate was 78%. There was a positive association between prior experience with the Guardian and subsequent success rates (p=0.049). Successful insertion was associated with greater ease with insertion (p=0.012), and greater CSPs (p<0.0001). The most popular insertion technique was sideways-and-rotate. No other patient, airway or technique-related factors had any significant impact on success rates with the Guardian. Conclusion: The Guardian SAD demonstrated similar efficacy to other SADs as reported in the literature. Prior familiarization with a new airway device is a key determinant in its successful use.