Cargando…

Clinical performance of Ambu AuraGain(TM) versus i-gel(TM) in anesthetized children: a prospective, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Ambu AuraGain and i-gel have different characteristics in design each other. However, few reports evaluate which device has more benefits for ventilation in children undergoing paralyzed general anesthesia. This prospective, randomized controlled trial compared the clinical performance A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Ji-Hyun, Nam, Seungpyo, Jang, Young-Eun, Kim, Eun-Hee, Kim, Hee-Soo, Kim, Jin-Tae
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Society of Anesthesiologists 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7713828/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33329810
http://dx.doi.org/10.17085/apm.2020.15.2.173
_version_ 1783618624890601472
author Lee, Ji-Hyun
Nam, Seungpyo
Jang, Young-Eun
Kim, Eun-Hee
Kim, Hee-Soo
Kim, Jin-Tae
author_facet Lee, Ji-Hyun
Nam, Seungpyo
Jang, Young-Eun
Kim, Eun-Hee
Kim, Hee-Soo
Kim, Jin-Tae
author_sort Lee, Ji-Hyun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Ambu AuraGain and i-gel have different characteristics in design each other. However, few reports evaluate which device has more benefits for ventilation in children undergoing paralyzed general anesthesia. This prospective, randomized controlled trial compared the clinical performance AuraGain and i-gel in anesthetized children. METHODS: Children aged between 1 month and 7 years undergoing elective surgery were randomly assigned to the AuraGain and i-gel groups. The primary outcome was initial oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP). Secondary outcomes were OLP at 10 min post-insertion, first-attempt and total insertion success rates, number of attempts and ease of gastric suction catheter placement, peak inspiratory pressure, fiberoptic bronchoscopic view score, ventilation quality, requirement of additional manipulation post-insertion, and complications. RESULTS: Data of 93 patients were analyzed. The initial OLPs of the AuraGain and i-gel were 27.5 ± 7.7 and 25.0 ± 8.0 cmH(2)O, respectively (P = 0.130). The OLP was significantly increased 10 min post-insertion in both groups. The initial success rates of the AuraGain and i-gel insertion were comparable. Suction catheter placement via the gastric port was easier (P = 0.018) and fiberoptic bronchoscopic view was better with the AuraGain (P < 0.001). The i-gel required additional manipulations post-insertion (P = 0.038). The incidence of complications during the emergence period was 10.8% for the i-gel(TM) and 2.2% for the AuraGain (P = 0.1) CONCLUSIONS: OLP is comparable between AuraGain and i-gel. The AuraGain would be more favorable than the i-gel(TM) for use in pediatric patients under general anesthesia considering other outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7713828
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Korean Society of Anesthesiologists
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77138282020-12-15 Clinical performance of Ambu AuraGain(TM) versus i-gel(TM) in anesthetized children: a prospective, randomized controlled trial Lee, Ji-Hyun Nam, Seungpyo Jang, Young-Eun Kim, Eun-Hee Kim, Hee-Soo Kim, Jin-Tae Anesth Pain Med (Seoul) Pediatric Anesthesia BACKGROUND: Ambu AuraGain and i-gel have different characteristics in design each other. However, few reports evaluate which device has more benefits for ventilation in children undergoing paralyzed general anesthesia. This prospective, randomized controlled trial compared the clinical performance AuraGain and i-gel in anesthetized children. METHODS: Children aged between 1 month and 7 years undergoing elective surgery were randomly assigned to the AuraGain and i-gel groups. The primary outcome was initial oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP). Secondary outcomes were OLP at 10 min post-insertion, first-attempt and total insertion success rates, number of attempts and ease of gastric suction catheter placement, peak inspiratory pressure, fiberoptic bronchoscopic view score, ventilation quality, requirement of additional manipulation post-insertion, and complications. RESULTS: Data of 93 patients were analyzed. The initial OLPs of the AuraGain and i-gel were 27.5 ± 7.7 and 25.0 ± 8.0 cmH(2)O, respectively (P = 0.130). The OLP was significantly increased 10 min post-insertion in both groups. The initial success rates of the AuraGain and i-gel insertion were comparable. Suction catheter placement via the gastric port was easier (P = 0.018) and fiberoptic bronchoscopic view was better with the AuraGain (P < 0.001). The i-gel required additional manipulations post-insertion (P = 0.038). The incidence of complications during the emergence period was 10.8% for the i-gel(TM) and 2.2% for the AuraGain (P = 0.1) CONCLUSIONS: OLP is comparable between AuraGain and i-gel. The AuraGain would be more favorable than the i-gel(TM) for use in pediatric patients under general anesthesia considering other outcomes. Korean Society of Anesthesiologists 2020-04-30 2020-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7713828/ /pubmed/33329810 http://dx.doi.org/10.17085/apm.2020.15.2.173 Text en Copyright © the Korean Society of Anesthesiologists, 2020 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Pediatric Anesthesia
Lee, Ji-Hyun
Nam, Seungpyo
Jang, Young-Eun
Kim, Eun-Hee
Kim, Hee-Soo
Kim, Jin-Tae
Clinical performance of Ambu AuraGain(TM) versus i-gel(TM) in anesthetized children: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
title Clinical performance of Ambu AuraGain(TM) versus i-gel(TM) in anesthetized children: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
title_full Clinical performance of Ambu AuraGain(TM) versus i-gel(TM) in anesthetized children: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Clinical performance of Ambu AuraGain(TM) versus i-gel(TM) in anesthetized children: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Clinical performance of Ambu AuraGain(TM) versus i-gel(TM) in anesthetized children: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
title_short Clinical performance of Ambu AuraGain(TM) versus i-gel(TM) in anesthetized children: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
title_sort clinical performance of ambu auragain(tm) versus i-gel(tm) in anesthetized children: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
topic Pediatric Anesthesia
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7713828/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33329810
http://dx.doi.org/10.17085/apm.2020.15.2.173
work_keys_str_mv AT leejihyun clinicalperformanceofambuauragaintmversusigeltminanesthetizedchildrenaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT namseungpyo clinicalperformanceofambuauragaintmversusigeltminanesthetizedchildrenaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT jangyoungeun clinicalperformanceofambuauragaintmversusigeltminanesthetizedchildrenaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT kimeunhee clinicalperformanceofambuauragaintmversusigeltminanesthetizedchildrenaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT kimheesoo clinicalperformanceofambuauragaintmversusigeltminanesthetizedchildrenaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT kimjintae clinicalperformanceofambuauragaintmversusigeltminanesthetizedchildrenaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial