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

页码：973 / 979

页数：7