Cargando…

Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Success Rate of Blockbuster Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Fastrach Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway During Blind Endotracheal Intubation

Background A new piece of equipment, the Blockbuster (BB) Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway (ILMA; Tuoren Medical India, Gurugram, India), was created in 2012. Dr. Chandy created the Fastrach (F) ILMA in 1997, which is another supraglottic airway equipment. The primary purpose of this study was to co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: V, Yuvaraj, SD, Pratibha, Alalamath, Santosh, Karigar, Shivanand L
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10282566/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37351224
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39321
_version_ 1785061161947889664
author V, Yuvaraj
SD, Pratibha
Alalamath, Santosh
Karigar, Shivanand L
author_facet V, Yuvaraj
SD, Pratibha
Alalamath, Santosh
Karigar, Shivanand L
author_sort V, Yuvaraj
collection PubMed
description Background A new piece of equipment, the Blockbuster (BB) Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway (ILMA; Tuoren Medical India, Gurugram, India), was created in 2012. Dr. Chandy created the Fastrach (F) ILMA in 1997, which is another supraglottic airway equipment. The primary purpose of this study was to compare the success rate of intubation with BB-ILMA and F-ILMA. Methods In the chosen age category of >20 to <70 years, undergoing general anesthesia for intubation with ILMAs, 55 patients were in the BB-ILMA (group B), and 55 patients were in the F-ILMA (group F). These ILMAs were put in after the induction and checked to see if adequate ventilation was accomplished with either of these devices. Once ventilation had been attained, we proceeded with fiberoptic scope to visualize the glottis, followed by blind intubation. The primary objective was to compare the first pass successful intubation of BB-ILMA and F-ILMA. The secondary objectives were ease of LMA insertion, time taken for intubation, hemodynamic changes, glottis fiberoptic view, and complications. Results The first pass successful intubation of the BB-ILMA and F-ILMA are 94.5% and 87.3%, respectively, whereas the time taken for intubation in BB-ILMA and F-ILMA are 25.02 seconds (s) and 42.77 s with a p-value of 0.0001, indicating a statistically significant relationship. Conclusion When compared to the F-ILMA (group F), the BB-ILMA (group B) has a higher success rate for blind tracheal intubation, with lesser time taken for intubation and fewer complications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10282566
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102825662023-06-22 Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Success Rate of Blockbuster Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Fastrach Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway During Blind Endotracheal Intubation V, Yuvaraj SD, Pratibha Alalamath, Santosh Karigar, Shivanand L Cureus Anesthesiology Background A new piece of equipment, the Blockbuster (BB) Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway (ILMA; Tuoren Medical India, Gurugram, India), was created in 2012. Dr. Chandy created the Fastrach (F) ILMA in 1997, which is another supraglottic airway equipment. The primary purpose of this study was to compare the success rate of intubation with BB-ILMA and F-ILMA. Methods In the chosen age category of >20 to <70 years, undergoing general anesthesia for intubation with ILMAs, 55 patients were in the BB-ILMA (group B), and 55 patients were in the F-ILMA (group F). These ILMAs were put in after the induction and checked to see if adequate ventilation was accomplished with either of these devices. Once ventilation had been attained, we proceeded with fiberoptic scope to visualize the glottis, followed by blind intubation. The primary objective was to compare the first pass successful intubation of BB-ILMA and F-ILMA. The secondary objectives were ease of LMA insertion, time taken for intubation, hemodynamic changes, glottis fiberoptic view, and complications. Results The first pass successful intubation of the BB-ILMA and F-ILMA are 94.5% and 87.3%, respectively, whereas the time taken for intubation in BB-ILMA and F-ILMA are 25.02 seconds (s) and 42.77 s with a p-value of 0.0001, indicating a statistically significant relationship. Conclusion When compared to the F-ILMA (group F), the BB-ILMA (group B) has a higher success rate for blind tracheal intubation, with lesser time taken for intubation and fewer complications. Cureus 2023-05-21 /pmc/articles/PMC10282566/ /pubmed/37351224 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39321 Text en Copyright © 2023, V et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Anesthesiology
V, Yuvaraj
SD, Pratibha
Alalamath, Santosh
Karigar, Shivanand L
Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Success Rate of Blockbuster Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Fastrach Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway During Blind Endotracheal Intubation
title Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Success Rate of Blockbuster Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Fastrach Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway During Blind Endotracheal Intubation
title_full Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Success Rate of Blockbuster Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Fastrach Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway During Blind Endotracheal Intubation
title_fullStr Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Success Rate of Blockbuster Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Fastrach Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway During Blind Endotracheal Intubation
title_full_unstemmed Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Success Rate of Blockbuster Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Fastrach Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway During Blind Endotracheal Intubation
title_short Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Success Rate of Blockbuster Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Fastrach Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway During Blind Endotracheal Intubation
title_sort randomized clinical trial comparing the success rate of blockbuster intubating laryngeal mask airway versus fastrach intubating laryngeal mask airway during blind endotracheal intubation
topic Anesthesiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10282566/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37351224
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39321
work_keys_str_mv AT vyuvaraj randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingthesuccessrateofblockbusterintubatinglaryngealmaskairwayversusfastrachintubatinglaryngealmaskairwayduringblindendotrachealintubation
AT sdpratibha randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingthesuccessrateofblockbusterintubatinglaryngealmaskairwayversusfastrachintubatinglaryngealmaskairwayduringblindendotrachealintubation
AT alalamathsantosh randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingthesuccessrateofblockbusterintubatinglaryngealmaskairwayversusfastrachintubatinglaryngealmaskairwayduringblindendotrachealintubation
AT karigarshivanandl randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingthesuccessrateofblockbusterintubatinglaryngealmaskairwayversusfastrachintubatinglaryngealmaskairwayduringblindendotrachealintubation