Cargando…

Comparison of Proseal LMA with i-Gel in children under controlled ventilation: a prospective randomised clinical study

BACKGROUND: Supraglottic airway device is presently the most common modality of airway management in children for short surgical procedures. The i-gel is one such novel supraglottic airway device with a non-inflatable cuff. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficiency of i-gel c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shiveshi, Praveen, Anandaswamy, Tejesh Channasandra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9373209/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33823205
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2021.02.042
_version_ 1784767553242923008
author Shiveshi, Praveen
Anandaswamy, Tejesh Channasandra
author_facet Shiveshi, Praveen
Anandaswamy, Tejesh Channasandra
author_sort Shiveshi, Praveen
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Supraglottic airway device is presently the most common modality of airway management in children for short surgical procedures. The i-gel is one such novel supraglottic airway device with a non-inflatable cuff. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficiency of i-gel compared to LMA Proseal regarding oropharyngeal leak pressure, insertion time, ease of insertion, and fibreoptic view of larynx. METHODS: After obtaining ethical clearance and parental consent, 70 children aged 2–10 years, weighing 10–30 kg were randomised to receive LMA Proseal or i-gel for airway management. Data with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure, insertion time, ease of insertion, number of attempts, and fibreoptic score were collected. The primary outcome was the oropharyngeal leak pressure with the two supraglottic airway devices measured by manometric stability. RESULTS: Demographic data were comparable between the two groups. The oropharyngeal leak pressure (LMA Proseal vs. i-gel, 20.51 ± 4.71 cmH(2)O vs. 19.57 ± 5.71 cmH(2)O), ease of insertion, number of attempts, and fibreoptic view score was similar between the two groups. The insertion time was faster with i-gel (22.63 ± 5.79 s) compared to LMA Proseal (43.26 ± 7.85 s). CONCLUSION: I-gel was similar to LMA Proseal with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure in children under controlled ventilation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9373209
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93732092022-08-15 Comparison of Proseal LMA with i-Gel in children under controlled ventilation: a prospective randomised clinical study Shiveshi, Praveen Anandaswamy, Tejesh Channasandra Braz J Anesthesiol Original Investigation BACKGROUND: Supraglottic airway device is presently the most common modality of airway management in children for short surgical procedures. The i-gel is one such novel supraglottic airway device with a non-inflatable cuff. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficiency of i-gel compared to LMA Proseal regarding oropharyngeal leak pressure, insertion time, ease of insertion, and fibreoptic view of larynx. METHODS: After obtaining ethical clearance and parental consent, 70 children aged 2–10 years, weighing 10–30 kg were randomised to receive LMA Proseal or i-gel for airway management. Data with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure, insertion time, ease of insertion, number of attempts, and fibreoptic score were collected. The primary outcome was the oropharyngeal leak pressure with the two supraglottic airway devices measured by manometric stability. RESULTS: Demographic data were comparable between the two groups. The oropharyngeal leak pressure (LMA Proseal vs. i-gel, 20.51 ± 4.71 cmH(2)O vs. 19.57 ± 5.71 cmH(2)O), ease of insertion, number of attempts, and fibreoptic view score was similar between the two groups. The insertion time was faster with i-gel (22.63 ± 5.79 s) compared to LMA Proseal (43.26 ± 7.85 s). CONCLUSION: I-gel was similar to LMA Proseal with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure in children under controlled ventilation. Elsevier 2021-04-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9373209/ /pubmed/33823205 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2021.02.042 Text en © 2021 Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia. Published by Elsevier Editora Ltda. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Shiveshi, Praveen
Anandaswamy, Tejesh Channasandra
Comparison of Proseal LMA with i-Gel in children under controlled ventilation: a prospective randomised clinical study
title Comparison of Proseal LMA with i-Gel in children under controlled ventilation: a prospective randomised clinical study
title_full Comparison of Proseal LMA with i-Gel in children under controlled ventilation: a prospective randomised clinical study
title_fullStr Comparison of Proseal LMA with i-Gel in children under controlled ventilation: a prospective randomised clinical study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Proseal LMA with i-Gel in children under controlled ventilation: a prospective randomised clinical study
title_short Comparison of Proseal LMA with i-Gel in children under controlled ventilation: a prospective randomised clinical study
title_sort comparison of proseal lma with i-gel in children under controlled ventilation: a prospective randomised clinical study
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9373209/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33823205
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2021.02.042
work_keys_str_mv AT shiveshipraveen comparisonofproseallmawithigelinchildrenundercontrolledventilationaprospectiverandomisedclinicalstudy
AT anandaswamytejeshchannasandra comparisonofproseallmawithigelinchildrenundercontrolledventilationaprospectiverandomisedclinicalstudy