A randomised comparison of the self-pressurised air-Q™ intubating laryngeal airway with the LMA Unique™ in children

被引：22
作者：
Jagannathan, N. [1 ,2 ]
Sohn, L. E. [1 ,2 ]
Sawardekar, A. [1 ,2 ]
Shah, R. [1 ,2 ]
Ryan, K. [1 ]
Jagannathan, R. [1 ]
Anderson, K. [1 ]
机构：
[1] Ann & Robert H Lurie Childrens Hosp Chicago, Dept Pediat Anesthesia, Chicago, IL USA
[2] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
来源：
ANAESTHESIA | 2012年 / 67卷 / 09期
关键词：
MASK AIRWAY; PEDIATRIC-PATIENTS; TRACHEAL INTUBATION; I-GELTM; TRIAL; LMA-PROSEAL(TM); INSERTION; SEAL;
D O I：
10.1111/j.1365-2044.2012.07199.x
中图分类号：
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号：
100217 ;
摘要：
We conducted a randomised trial comparing the self-pressurised air-QTM intubating laryngeal airway (air-Q SP) with the LMA-Unique in 60 children undergoing surgery. Outcomes measured were airway leak pressure, ease and time for insertion, fibreoptic examination, incidence of gastric insufflation and complications. Median (IQR [range]) time to successful device placement was faster with the air-Q SP (12 (1015 [518])) s than with the LMA-Unique (14 (1217 [622]) s; p = 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the air-Q SP and LMA-Unique in initial airway leak pressures (16 (1418 [1029]) compared with 18 (1520 [1030]) cmH2O, p = 0.12), an airway leak pressures at 10 min (19 (1622 [1230]) compared with 20 (1622 [1030]) cmH2O, p = 0.81); fibreoptic position, incidence of gastric insufflation, or complications. Both devices provided effective ventilation without the need for airway manipulation. The air-Q SP is an alternative to the LMA-Unique should the clinician prefer a device not requiring cuff monitoring during anaesthesia.
引用
收藏
页码：973 / 979
页数：7
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]   Pilot study of the air-Q Intubating Laryngeal Airway in clinical use [J].
Bakker, E. J. ;
Valkenburg, M. ;
Galvin, E. M. .
ANAESTHESIA AND INTENSIVE CARE, 2010, 38 (02) :346-348
[2]   Reliability of epigastric auscultation to detect gastric insufflation [J].
Brimacombe, J ;
Keller, C ;
Kurian, S ;
Myles, J .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2002, 88 (01) :127-129
[3]   Evaluation of the LMA Supreme™ in 100 non-paralysed patients [J].
Cook, T. M. ;
Gatward, J. J. ;
Handel, J. ;
Hardy, R. ;
Thompson, C. ;
Srivastava, R. ;
Clarke, P. A. .
ANAESTHESIA, 2009, 64 (05) :555-562
[4]   Jaw thrusting as a clinical test to assess the adequate depth of anaesthesia for insertion of the laryngeal mask [J].
Drage, MP ;
Nunez, J ;
Vaughan, RS ;
Asai, T .
ANAESTHESIA, 1996, 51 (12) :1167-1170
[5]   Directly measured mucosal pressures produced by the i-gelTM and laryngeal mask airway SupremeTM in paralysed anaesthetised patients [J].
Eschertzhuber, S. ;
Brimacombe, J. ;
Kaufmann, M. ;
Keller, C. ;
Tiefenthaler, W. .
ANAESTHESIA, 2012, 67 (04) :407-410
[6]   The air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway vs the LMA-ProSeal™: a prospective, randomised trial of airway seal pressure [J].
Galgon, R. E. ;
Schroeder, K. M. ;
Han, S. ;
Andrei, A. ;
Joffe, A. M. .
ANAESTHESIA, 2011, 66 (12) :1093-1100
[7]   A randomized crossover comparison of the size 2 1/2 laryngeal mask airway ProSeal™ versus Laryngeal Mask Airway-Classic™ in pediatric patients [J].
Goldmann, K ;
Jakob, C .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2005, 100 (06) :1605-1610
[8]   Higher airway seal does not imply adequate positioning of laryngeal mask airways in paediatric patients [J].
Inagawa, G ;
Okuda, K ;
Miwa, T ;
Hiroki, K .
PAEDIATRIC ANAESTHESIA, 2002, 12 (04) :322-326
[9]   A randomised trial comparing the laryngeal mask airway Supreme™ with the laryngeal mask airway Unique™ in children [J].
Jagannathan, N. ;
Sohn, L. E. ;
Sawardekar, A. ;
Chang, E. ;
Langen, K. E. ;
Anderson, K. .
ANAESTHESIA, 2012, 67 (02) :139-144
[10]   A randomized crossover comparison between the Laryngeal Mask Airway-Unique™ and the air-Q Intubating Laryngeal Airway in children* [J].
Jagannathan, Narasimhan ;
Sohn, Lisa E. ;
Mankoo, Ravinder ;
Langen, Kenneth E. ;
Mandler, Tessa .
PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2012, 22 (02) :161-167
123