A randomized comparison of the i-gel™ with the self-pressurized air-Q™ intubating laryngeal airway in children

被引:33
|
作者
Kim, Min-Soo [1 ]
Lee, Jae Hoon [1 ]
Han, Sang Won [2 ,3 ]
Im, Young Jae [2 ,3 ]
Kang, Hyo Jong [1 ]
Lee, Jeong-Rim [1 ]
机构
[1] Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Anesthesia & Pain Res Inst, Dept Anesthesiol & Pain Med, Seoul 120752, South Korea
[2] Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Urol, Seoul 120752, South Korea
[3] Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Urol Sci Inst, Seoul 120752, South Korea
关键词
airway management; anesthesia; children; clinical trial; laryngeal mask airway; pediatrics; MASK AIRWAY; INTRACUFF PRESSURES; CUFF PRESSURE; I-GELTM; INFANTS; PERFORMANCE; LMA; VENTILATION; SUPREME; DEVICE;
D O I
10.1111/pan.12609
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
BackgroundSupraglottic airway devices with noninflatable cuff have advantages in omitting the cuff pressure monitoring and reducing potential pharyngolaryngeal complications. Typical devices without cuff inflation available in children are the i-gel and the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway (air-Q SP). To date, there is no comparative study between these devices in pediatric patients. AimThe purpose of this randomized study was to compare the i-gel and the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway (air-Q SP) in children undergoing general anesthesia. MethodsEighty children, 1-108months of age, 7-30kg of weight, and scheduled for elective surgery in which supraglottic airway devices would be suitable for airway management, were randomly assigned to either the i-gel or the air-Q SP. Oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic view were assessed three times as follows: after insertion and fixation of the device, 10min after initial assessment, and after completion of surgery. We also assessed insertion parameters and complications. ResultsInsertion of the i-gel was regarded as significantly easier compared to the air-Q SP (P=0.04). Compared to the air-Q SP group, the i-gel group had significantly higher oropharyngeal leak pressures at all measurement points and significantly lower frequencies of gastric insufflation at 10min after initial assessment and completion of surgery. The air-Q SP group had better fiberoptic views than the i-gel group at all measurement points. ConclusionOur results showed that the i-gel had easier insertion and better sealing function, and the air-Q SP provided improved fiberoptic views in children requiring general anesthesia.
引用
收藏
页码:405 / 412
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Prospective, Randomized Comparison of the i-gel and the Self-Pressurized air-Q Intubating Laryngeal Airway in Elderly Anesthetized Patients
    Lee, Jeong Soo
    Kim, Do-Hyeong
    Choi, Seung Ho
    Ha, Sang Hee
    Kim, Sijin
    Kim, Min-Soo
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2020, 130 (02): : 480 - 487
  • [2] Prospective evaluation of the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway in children
    Jagannathan, Narasimhan
    Sohn, Lisa E.
    Mankoo, Ravinder
    Langen, Kenneth E.
    Roth, Andrew G.
    Hall, Steven C.
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2011, 21 (06) : 673 - 680
  • [3] Self-pressurized air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway versus the LMA® Classic™: a randomized clinical trial
    Ha, Sang Hee
    Kim, Min-Soo
    Suh, Jiwoo
    Lee, Jong Seok
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA-JOURNAL CANADIEN D ANESTHESIE, 2018, 65 (05): : 543 - 550
  • [4] Self-pressurized air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway versus the LMA® Classic™: a randomized clinical trial; [Étude clinique randomisée du masque laryngé d’intubation Self-pressurized air-Q ® versus le LMA ® Classic MD]
    Ha S.H.
    Kim M.-S.
    Suh J.
    Lee J.S.
    Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, 2018, 65 (5): : 543 - 550
  • [5] A randomized crossover comparison between the Laryngeal Mask Airway-Unique™ and the air-Q Intubating Laryngeal Airway in children*
    Jagannathan, Narasimhan
    Sohn, Lisa E.
    Mankoo, Ravinder
    Langen, Kenneth E.
    Mandler, Tessa
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2012, 22 (02) : 161 - 167
  • [6] A randomised comparison of the self-pressurised air-Q™ intubating laryngeal airway with the LMA Unique™ in children
    Jagannathan, N.
    Sohn, L. E.
    Sawardekar, A.
    Shah, R.
    Ryan, K.
    Jagannathan, R.
    Anderson, K.
    ANAESTHESIA, 2012, 67 (09) : 973 - 979
  • [7] A randomized comparison the of the air-Q (R) intubating laryngeal airway and Ambu (R) AuraGain (TM) laryngeal mask for controlled ventilation in children
    Said, Nirawanti Mohamad
    Zaini, Rhendra Hardy Mohamad
    Hassan, Wan Mohd Nazaruddin Wan
    Iberahim, Mohamad Ibariyah
    Chong, Soon Eu
    ANAESTHESIA PAIN & INTENSIVE CARE, 2018, 22 (04) : 444 - 451
  • [8] Comparison of performance and efficacy of air-Q intubating laryngeal airway and flexible laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized and paralyzed infants and children
    Darlong, Vanlal
    Biyani, Ghansham
    Pandey, Ravindra
    Baidya, Dalim K.
    Chandralekha
    Punj, Jyotsna
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2014, 24 (10) : 1066 - 1071
  • [9] The air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway for endotracheal intubation in children with difficult airway: our experience
    Ferrari, Fabio
    Laviani, Raoul
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2012, 22 (05) : 500 - 500
  • [10] The air-Q intubating laryngeal airway in neonates with difficult airways
    Fiadjoe, John E.
    Stricker, Paul A.
    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, 2011, 21 (06) : 703 - 703