Cargando…

Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients

BACKGROUND: The i-gel™, LMA-Supreme (LMA-S) and Laryngeal Tube Suction-D (LTS-D) are single-use supraglottic airway devices with an inbuilt drainage channel. We compared them with regard to their position in situ as well as to clinical performance data during elective surgery. METHODS: Prospective,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Russo, Sebastian G, Cremer, Stephan, Galli, Tamara, Eich, Christoph, Bräuer, Anselm, Crozier, Thomas A, Bauer, Martin, Strack, Micha
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3434115/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22871204
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-12-18
_version_ 1782242396171403264
author Russo, Sebastian G
Cremer, Stephan
Galli, Tamara
Eich, Christoph
Bräuer, Anselm
Crozier, Thomas A
Bauer, Martin
Strack, Micha
author_facet Russo, Sebastian G
Cremer, Stephan
Galli, Tamara
Eich, Christoph
Bräuer, Anselm
Crozier, Thomas A
Bauer, Martin
Strack, Micha
author_sort Russo, Sebastian G
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The i-gel™, LMA-Supreme (LMA-S) and Laryngeal Tube Suction-D (LTS-D) are single-use supraglottic airway devices with an inbuilt drainage channel. We compared them with regard to their position in situ as well as to clinical performance data during elective surgery. METHODS: Prospective, randomized, comparative study of three groups of 40 elective surgical patients each. Speed of insertion and success rates, leak pressures (LP) at different cuff pressures, dynamic airway compliance, and signs of postoperative airway morbidity were recorded. Fibreoptic evaluation was used to determine the devices’ position in situ. RESULTS: Leak pressures were similar (i-gel™ 25.9, LMA-S 27.1, LTS-D 24.0 cmH(2)O; the latter two at 60 cmH(2)O cuff pressure) as were insertion times (i-gel™ 10, LMA-S 11, LTS-D 14 sec). LP of the LMA-S was higher than that of the LTS-D at lower cuff pressures (p <0.05). Insertion success rates differed significantly: i-gel™ 95%, LMA-S 95%, LTS-D 70% (p <0.05). The fibreoptically assessed position was more frequently suboptimal with the LTS-D but this was not associated with impaired ventilation. Dynamic airway compliance was highest with the i-gel™ and lowest with the LTS-D (p <0.05). Airway morbidity was more pronounced with the LTS-D (p <0.01). CONCLUSION: All devices were suitable for ventilating the patients’ lungs during elective surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00000760
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3434115
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34341152012-09-10 Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients Russo, Sebastian G Cremer, Stephan Galli, Tamara Eich, Christoph Bräuer, Anselm Crozier, Thomas A Bauer, Martin Strack, Micha BMC Anesthesiol Research Article BACKGROUND: The i-gel™, LMA-Supreme (LMA-S) and Laryngeal Tube Suction-D (LTS-D) are single-use supraglottic airway devices with an inbuilt drainage channel. We compared them with regard to their position in situ as well as to clinical performance data during elective surgery. METHODS: Prospective, randomized, comparative study of three groups of 40 elective surgical patients each. Speed of insertion and success rates, leak pressures (LP) at different cuff pressures, dynamic airway compliance, and signs of postoperative airway morbidity were recorded. Fibreoptic evaluation was used to determine the devices’ position in situ. RESULTS: Leak pressures were similar (i-gel™ 25.9, LMA-S 27.1, LTS-D 24.0 cmH(2)O; the latter two at 60 cmH(2)O cuff pressure) as were insertion times (i-gel™ 10, LMA-S 11, LTS-D 14 sec). LP of the LMA-S was higher than that of the LTS-D at lower cuff pressures (p <0.05). Insertion success rates differed significantly: i-gel™ 95%, LMA-S 95%, LTS-D 70% (p <0.05). The fibreoptically assessed position was more frequently suboptimal with the LTS-D but this was not associated with impaired ventilation. Dynamic airway compliance was highest with the i-gel™ and lowest with the LTS-D (p <0.05). Airway morbidity was more pronounced with the LTS-D (p <0.01). CONCLUSION: All devices were suitable for ventilating the patients’ lungs during elective surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00000760 BioMed Central 2012-08-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3434115/ /pubmed/22871204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-12-18 Text en Copyright ©2012 Russo et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Russo, Sebastian G
Cremer, Stephan
Galli, Tamara
Eich, Christoph
Bräuer, Anselm
Crozier, Thomas A
Bauer, Martin
Strack, Micha
Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients
title Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients
title_full Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients
title_fullStr Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients
title_full_unstemmed Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients
title_short Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients
title_sort randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the lma supreme™, and the laryngeal tube suction-d using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3434115/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22871204
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-12-18
work_keys_str_mv AT russosebastiang randomizedcomparisonoftheigelthelmasupremeandthelaryngealtubesuctiondusingclinicalandfibreopticassessmentsinelectivepatients
AT cremerstephan randomizedcomparisonoftheigelthelmasupremeandthelaryngealtubesuctiondusingclinicalandfibreopticassessmentsinelectivepatients
AT gallitamara randomizedcomparisonoftheigelthelmasupremeandthelaryngealtubesuctiondusingclinicalandfibreopticassessmentsinelectivepatients
AT eichchristoph randomizedcomparisonoftheigelthelmasupremeandthelaryngealtubesuctiondusingclinicalandfibreopticassessmentsinelectivepatients
AT braueranselm randomizedcomparisonoftheigelthelmasupremeandthelaryngealtubesuctiondusingclinicalandfibreopticassessmentsinelectivepatients
AT crozierthomasa randomizedcomparisonoftheigelthelmasupremeandthelaryngealtubesuctiondusingclinicalandfibreopticassessmentsinelectivepatients
AT bauermartin randomizedcomparisonoftheigelthelmasupremeandthelaryngealtubesuctiondusingclinicalandfibreopticassessmentsinelectivepatients
AT strackmicha randomizedcomparisonoftheigelthelmasupremeandthelaryngealtubesuctiondusingclinicalandfibreopticassessmentsinelectivepatients