Cargando…

A randomized comparative study of three supraglottic airway devices for controlled ventilation in anesthetized patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The LMA® ProSeal™, LMA® Supreme™ and Ambu® AuraGain™ are second-generation supraglottic airway devices (SADs) with integrated gastric access. In this study, we compared the clinical performance of these three devices in adults for controlled ventilation in anesthetized paralysed...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sharma, Manoj, Sharma, Bimla, Gupta, Manish, Panday, Bhuwan Chand, Sahai, Chand, Sood, Jayashree
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9511860/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36171925
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/joacp.JOACP_465_20
_version_ 1784797730171781120
author Sharma, Manoj
Sharma, Bimla
Gupta, Manish
Panday, Bhuwan Chand
Sahai, Chand
Sood, Jayashree
author_facet Sharma, Manoj
Sharma, Bimla
Gupta, Manish
Panday, Bhuwan Chand
Sahai, Chand
Sood, Jayashree
author_sort Sharma, Manoj
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The LMA® ProSeal™, LMA® Supreme™ and Ambu® AuraGain™ are second-generation supraglottic airway devices (SADs) with integrated gastric access. In this study, we compared the clinical performance of these three devices in adults for controlled ventilation in anesthetized paralysed patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two hundred and seventy adults, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status I-III, undergoing elective surgical procedures, were randomized into three groups with 90 patients in each: Group 1: LMA® ProSeal™, Group 2: LMA® Supreme™ and Group 3: Ambu® AuraGain™. All the three devices were evaluated for oropharyngeal seal pressure (OSP) and other parameters: ease and the number of attempts at device placement, fibreoptic laryngeal view and intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS: In the present study, the mean OSP was 38.9 ± 3.050 cm H(2)O in the LMA ProSeal™ group, 37.41 ± 4.097 cm H(2)O in LMA® Supreme™ group and 37.32 ± 3.740 cm H(2)O in Ambu® AuraGain™ group. The difference was found to be statistically significant (P = 0.006). The three groups were comparable for the ease of device insertion, number of attempts at device placement, fibreoptic laryngeal view, intraoperative and postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: In this study, we found that the LMA® ProSeal™ provided the highest OSP in comparison to the other two devices, even though this difference is not clinically relevant. The use of Ambu® AuraGain™ was associated with difficult and lowest first-time insertion success rate (P < 0.001) along with an increased incidence of airway trauma as compared to the other two SADs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9511860
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95118602022-09-27 A randomized comparative study of three supraglottic airway devices for controlled ventilation in anesthetized patients Sharma, Manoj Sharma, Bimla Gupta, Manish Panday, Bhuwan Chand Sahai, Chand Sood, Jayashree J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol Original Article BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The LMA® ProSeal™, LMA® Supreme™ and Ambu® AuraGain™ are second-generation supraglottic airway devices (SADs) with integrated gastric access. In this study, we compared the clinical performance of these three devices in adults for controlled ventilation in anesthetized paralysed patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two hundred and seventy adults, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status I-III, undergoing elective surgical procedures, were randomized into three groups with 90 patients in each: Group 1: LMA® ProSeal™, Group 2: LMA® Supreme™ and Group 3: Ambu® AuraGain™. All the three devices were evaluated for oropharyngeal seal pressure (OSP) and other parameters: ease and the number of attempts at device placement, fibreoptic laryngeal view and intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS: In the present study, the mean OSP was 38.9 ± 3.050 cm H(2)O in the LMA ProSeal™ group, 37.41 ± 4.097 cm H(2)O in LMA® Supreme™ group and 37.32 ± 3.740 cm H(2)O in Ambu® AuraGain™ group. The difference was found to be statistically significant (P = 0.006). The three groups were comparable for the ease of device insertion, number of attempts at device placement, fibreoptic laryngeal view, intraoperative and postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: In this study, we found that the LMA® ProSeal™ provided the highest OSP in comparison to the other two devices, even though this difference is not clinically relevant. The use of Ambu® AuraGain™ was associated with difficult and lowest first-time insertion success rate (P < 0.001) along with an increased incidence of airway trauma as compared to the other two SADs. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022 2021-11-18 /pmc/articles/PMC9511860/ /pubmed/36171925 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/joacp.JOACP_465_20 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology 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
Sharma, Manoj
Sharma, Bimla
Gupta, Manish
Panday, Bhuwan Chand
Sahai, Chand
Sood, Jayashree
A randomized comparative study of three supraglottic airway devices for controlled ventilation in anesthetized patients
title A randomized comparative study of three supraglottic airway devices for controlled ventilation in anesthetized patients
title_full A randomized comparative study of three supraglottic airway devices for controlled ventilation in anesthetized patients
title_fullStr A randomized comparative study of three supraglottic airway devices for controlled ventilation in anesthetized patients
title_full_unstemmed A randomized comparative study of three supraglottic airway devices for controlled ventilation in anesthetized patients
title_short A randomized comparative study of three supraglottic airway devices for controlled ventilation in anesthetized patients
title_sort randomized comparative study of three supraglottic airway devices for controlled ventilation in anesthetized patients
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9511860/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36171925
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/joacp.JOACP_465_20
work_keys_str_mv AT sharmamanoj arandomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT sharmabimla arandomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT guptamanish arandomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT pandaybhuwanchand arandomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT sahaichand arandomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT soodjayashree arandomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT sharmamanoj randomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT sharmabimla randomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT guptamanish randomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT pandaybhuwanchand randomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT sahaichand randomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients
AT soodjayashree randomizedcomparativestudyofthreesupraglotticairwaydevicesforcontrolledventilationinanesthetizedpatients