Cargando…

Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and performance of the pediatric Ambu AuraOnce (Ambu AO) mask (Ambu, Copenhagen, Denmark) and i-gel mask (Intersurgical Ltd., Wokingham, United Kingdom). METHODS: From May 2015 to September 2016, 112 patients, 0-14 years old, underwent elective surgery at a tertia...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alzahem, Abdulrahman M., Aqil, Mansoor, Alzahrani, Tariq A., Aljazaeri, Ayman H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Saudi Medical Journal 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5447208/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28439597
http://dx.doi.org/10.15537/smj.2017.5.17960
_version_ 1783239279186542592
author Alzahem, Abdulrahman M.
Aqil, Mansoor
Alzahrani, Tariq A.
Aljazaeri, Ayman H.
author_facet Alzahem, Abdulrahman M.
Aqil, Mansoor
Alzahrani, Tariq A.
Aljazaeri, Ayman H.
author_sort Alzahem, Abdulrahman M.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and performance of the pediatric Ambu AuraOnce (Ambu AO) mask (Ambu, Copenhagen, Denmark) and i-gel mask (Intersurgical Ltd., Wokingham, United Kingdom). METHODS: From May 2015 to September 2016, 112 patients, 0-14 years old, underwent elective surgery at a tertiary university hospital (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia). They were randomly assigned to the Ambu AO or i-gel group. Three groups underwent a subgroup analysis: ≤5 kg (group 1), 5.1–10.0 kg (group 2), and >10 kg (group 3). RESULTS: The oropharyngeal leak pressure was significantly higher for the i-gel (25.4±4.1 cm H(2)O) than for the Ambu AO (22.5±3.9 cm H(2)O, p<0.001). The Ambu AO had a slightly higher ease of insertion compared to the i-gel (100% versus 94%, p=0.08) and required less manipulation (2% versus 11%, p=0.07).The Ambu AO and i-gel showed non-significant differences in performance between weight groups. There were statistically significant differences for higher leak pressure in group 2 (p=0.01) and group 3 (p=0.002) in favor of the i-gel, and for less manipulation in the Ambu AO in group 1 (p=0.04). Fiberoptic viewing was superior in group 2 for the i-gel (p=0.03) and in group 3 for the Ambu AO (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Both devices demonstrated equally good performance with low morbidity. The Ambu AO had a statistical tendency towards easier insertion and less manipulation. Confirming this finding will require large scale trials.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5447208
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Saudi Medical Journal
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54472082017-06-02 Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures: A randomized controlled trial Alzahem, Abdulrahman M. Aqil, Mansoor Alzahrani, Tariq A. Aljazaeri, Ayman H. Saudi Med J Original Article OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and performance of the pediatric Ambu AuraOnce (Ambu AO) mask (Ambu, Copenhagen, Denmark) and i-gel mask (Intersurgical Ltd., Wokingham, United Kingdom). METHODS: From May 2015 to September 2016, 112 patients, 0-14 years old, underwent elective surgery at a tertiary university hospital (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia). They were randomly assigned to the Ambu AO or i-gel group. Three groups underwent a subgroup analysis: ≤5 kg (group 1), 5.1–10.0 kg (group 2), and >10 kg (group 3). RESULTS: The oropharyngeal leak pressure was significantly higher for the i-gel (25.4±4.1 cm H(2)O) than for the Ambu AO (22.5±3.9 cm H(2)O, p<0.001). The Ambu AO had a slightly higher ease of insertion compared to the i-gel (100% versus 94%, p=0.08) and required less manipulation (2% versus 11%, p=0.07).The Ambu AO and i-gel showed non-significant differences in performance between weight groups. There were statistically significant differences for higher leak pressure in group 2 (p=0.01) and group 3 (p=0.002) in favor of the i-gel, and for less manipulation in the Ambu AO in group 1 (p=0.04). Fiberoptic viewing was superior in group 2 for the i-gel (p=0.03) and in group 3 for the Ambu AO (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Both devices demonstrated equally good performance with low morbidity. The Ambu AO had a statistical tendency towards easier insertion and less manipulation. Confirming this finding will require large scale trials. Saudi Medical Journal 2017-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5447208/ /pubmed/28439597 http://dx.doi.org/10.15537/smj.2017.5.17960 Text en Copyright: © Saudi Medical Journal http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Alzahem, Abdulrahman M.
Aqil, Mansoor
Alzahrani, Tariq A.
Aljazaeri, Ayman H.
Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures: A randomized controlled trial
title Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures: A randomized controlled trial
title_full Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures: A randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures: A randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures: A randomized controlled trial
title_short Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures: A randomized controlled trial
title_sort ambu auraonce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures: a randomized controlled trial
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5447208/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28439597
http://dx.doi.org/10.15537/smj.2017.5.17960
work_keys_str_mv AT alzahemabdulrahmanm ambuauraonceversusigellaryngealmaskairwayininfantsandchildrenundergoingsurgicalproceduresarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT aqilmansoor ambuauraonceversusigellaryngealmaskairwayininfantsandchildrenundergoingsurgicalproceduresarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT alzahranitariqa ambuauraonceversusigellaryngealmaskairwayininfantsandchildrenundergoingsurgicalproceduresarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT aljazaeriaymanh ambuauraonceversusigellaryngealmaskairwayininfantsandchildrenundergoingsurgicalproceduresarandomizedcontrolledtrial