Cargando…

Comparison of the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique – A randomised study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study was designed to compare the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique. METHODS: A total of 156 adult patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery under general anaesthesia were included. All partici...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vyas, Ankit, Bihani, Pooja, Jaju, Rishabh, Paliwal, Naveen, Tak, Mathura L., Choudhary, Usha
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9316669/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35903586
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_192_22
_version_ 1784754872104517632
author Vyas, Ankit
Bihani, Pooja
Jaju, Rishabh
Paliwal, Naveen
Tak, Mathura L.
Choudhary, Usha
author_facet Vyas, Ankit
Bihani, Pooja
Jaju, Rishabh
Paliwal, Naveen
Tak, Mathura L.
Choudhary, Usha
author_sort Vyas, Ankit
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study was designed to compare the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique. METHODS: A total of 156 adult patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery under general anaesthesia were included. All participants were randomly divided into two groups; I-gel™ was inserted with conventional blind and Macintosh laryngoscopic-guided technique in group A and B respectively. The primary objective of the study was to determine the incidence of optimal positioning in both the groups based on fibreoptic bronchoscope score of the glottic view. Oropharyngeal leak pressure, haemodynamic parameters and insertion characteristics were also compared. Categorical data were presented as ratio or percentage, continuous data were presented as mean ± standard deviation or median (95% confidence interval). The strength of association between insertion technique and the anatomical fit of the device was calculated by relative risk ratio. RESULTS: Fibreoptic scores were significantly better in laryngoscope-guided insertion group when compared to the blind insertion group (P < 0.0001). The incidence of malposition was 3.85% in the laryngoscopic insertion group and 39.4% in the blind insertion (P < 0.0001). Oropharyngeal leak pressure was higher in laryngoscope-guided insertion group than in blind insertion group (26.89 ± 3.37 cm H(2)O versus 24.42 ± 3.00 cm H(2)O; P < 0.0001). Other insertion characteristics except time taken to insert the device were comparable in both groups. CONCLUSION: When compared to the standard blind insertion technique, laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ results in better alignment with the laryngeal inlet providing a proper anatomical fit and better airway seal pressure.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9316669
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93166692022-07-27 Comparison of the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique – A randomised study Vyas, Ankit Bihani, Pooja Jaju, Rishabh Paliwal, Naveen Tak, Mathura L. Choudhary, Usha Indian J Anaesth Original Article BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study was designed to compare the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique. METHODS: A total of 156 adult patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery under general anaesthesia were included. All participants were randomly divided into two groups; I-gel™ was inserted with conventional blind and Macintosh laryngoscopic-guided technique in group A and B respectively. The primary objective of the study was to determine the incidence of optimal positioning in both the groups based on fibreoptic bronchoscope score of the glottic view. Oropharyngeal leak pressure, haemodynamic parameters and insertion characteristics were also compared. Categorical data were presented as ratio or percentage, continuous data were presented as mean ± standard deviation or median (95% confidence interval). The strength of association between insertion technique and the anatomical fit of the device was calculated by relative risk ratio. RESULTS: Fibreoptic scores were significantly better in laryngoscope-guided insertion group when compared to the blind insertion group (P < 0.0001). The incidence of malposition was 3.85% in the laryngoscopic insertion group and 39.4% in the blind insertion (P < 0.0001). Oropharyngeal leak pressure was higher in laryngoscope-guided insertion group than in blind insertion group (26.89 ± 3.37 cm H(2)O versus 24.42 ± 3.00 cm H(2)O; P < 0.0001). Other insertion characteristics except time taken to insert the device were comparable in both groups. CONCLUSION: When compared to the standard blind insertion technique, laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ results in better alignment with the laryngeal inlet providing a proper anatomical fit and better airway seal pressure. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022-06 2022-06-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9316669/ /pubmed/35903586 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_192_22 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Indian Journal of Anaesthesia https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Vyas, Ankit
Bihani, Pooja
Jaju, Rishabh
Paliwal, Naveen
Tak, Mathura L.
Choudhary, Usha
Comparison of the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique – A randomised study
title Comparison of the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique – A randomised study
title_full Comparison of the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique – A randomised study
title_fullStr Comparison of the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique – A randomised study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique – A randomised study
title_short Comparison of the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of I-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique – A randomised study
title_sort comparison of the efficacy of macintosh laryngoscope-guided insertion of i-gel™ with the conventional blind insertion technique – a randomised study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9316669/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35903586
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_192_22
work_keys_str_mv AT vyasankit comparisonoftheefficacyofmacintoshlaryngoscopeguidedinsertionofigelwiththeconventionalblindinsertiontechniquearandomisedstudy
AT bihanipooja comparisonoftheefficacyofmacintoshlaryngoscopeguidedinsertionofigelwiththeconventionalblindinsertiontechniquearandomisedstudy
AT jajurishabh comparisonoftheefficacyofmacintoshlaryngoscopeguidedinsertionofigelwiththeconventionalblindinsertiontechniquearandomisedstudy
AT paliwalnaveen comparisonoftheefficacyofmacintoshlaryngoscopeguidedinsertionofigelwiththeconventionalblindinsertiontechniquearandomisedstudy
AT takmathural comparisonoftheefficacyofmacintoshlaryngoscopeguidedinsertionofigelwiththeconventionalblindinsertiontechniquearandomisedstudy
AT choudharyusha comparisonoftheefficacyofmacintoshlaryngoscopeguidedinsertionofigelwiththeconventionalblindinsertiontechniquearandomisedstudy