I-GEL™ VS. AURAONCE™ LARYNGEAL MASK FOR GENERAL ANAESTHESIA WITH CONTROLLED VENTILATION IN PARALYZED PATIENTS

被引:17
|
作者
Donaldson, William [1 ]
Abraham, Alexander [1 ]
Deighan, Mairead [2 ]
Michalek, Pavel [1 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Antrim Area Hosp, Dept Anaesthesia, Antrim BT41 2RL, North Ireland
[2] Royal Victoria Hosp, Dept Anaesthesia, Belfast BT12 6BA, Antrim, North Ireland
[3] Charles Univ Prague, Fac Med 1, Dept Anaesthesiol & Intens Care, Prague 12808 2, Czech Republic
[4] Gen Univ Hosp, Prague 12808 2, Czech Republic
来源
BIOMEDICAL PAPERS-OLOMOUC | 2011年 / 155卷 / 02期
关键词
Laryngeal mask; Intermittent positive-pressure ventilation; Airway pressure; Postoperative complications; SUPRAGLOTTIC AIRWAY DEVICE; I-GEL; DIFFICULT AIRWAY; ESOPHAGEAL VENT; LMA-UNIQUE; ASPIRATION; PRESSURE; ROCURONIUM; PROSEAL; CUFF;
D O I
10.5507/bp.2011.023
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Aims. The i-gel (TM) and the AuraOnce (TM) laryngeal mask are supraglottic airway devices used for airway management during general anaesthesia. Both devices are cheap, disposable and widely used. They may be used with both spontaneous and controlled ventilation. This study compared differences in the seal and peak pressures, and postoperative complications in these devices when used in paralyzed patients under controlled ventilation. Methods. A prospective randomized trial was designed to compare the igel (TM) and the AuraOnce (TM) in paralyzed adult patients under conditions of controlled ventilation. Two hundred and four patients (ASA class 1-3, age 18-89, weight 46-115 kg) were enrolled in the study. Standardized anaesthesia (fentanyl, propofol and sevoflurane in air-oxygen) was administered including neuromuscular blockade. The primary outcome measure was the difference in seal airway pressures between the two devices. Secondary outcome measures included peak airway pressures, insertion data and postoperative profiles - the incidence of sore throat, swallowing difficulties, numb tongue, hearing difficulties, neck pain, nausea and vomiting. Results. First time insertions were 85.6% (i-gel) and 82% (AuraOnce) with overall success rates 96.3% (i-gel) and 94.2% (AuraOnce) (p=0.54). Average insertion times were 11.0 s (i-gel) and 11.6 s (AuraOnce) (p=0.19). Seal pressures were 30.4 cmH(2)O (i-gel) and 27.8 cmH(2)O (AuraOnce) (p=0.007). Peak pressures were 15.3 cmH(2)O (i-gel) and 15.6 cmH(2)O (AuraOnce) (p=0.57). Traumatic insertion occurred in 5.8% of igel (TM) and 2% of AuraOnce (TM) insertions. The overall incidence of postoperative complications was low, with the i-gel (TM) causing less sore throat and difficulty swallowing at 24h. Conclusion. Both devices provided effective seals for ventilation under positive pressure. I-gel (TM) may be a better alternative for the procedures with controlled ventilation because of higher seal pressures and lower incidence of sore throat postoperatively.
引用
收藏
页码:155 / 163
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Einsatz der i-gel®-Larynxmaske bei schwierigem AtemwegUse of the i-gel® laryngeal mask for management of a difficult airway
    M. Emmerich
    R. Dummler
    Der Anaesthesist, 2008, 57 : 779 - 781
  • [22] A comparison of i-gel (TM) and Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme (TM) during general anesthesia in infants
    Lee, Yoon Chan
    Yoon, Kyoung Seop
    Park, Sang Yoong
    Choi, So Ron
    Chung, Chan Jong
    KOREAN JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2018, 71 (01) : 37 - 42
  • [23] Comparison of Frequency of Complications of i-Gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme™ in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
    Ali, Kashif
    Kumar, Ravi
    Ali, Abid
    Ali, Pervaiz
    Alam, M. Aneeque
    Kumar, Kelash
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL & HEALTH SCIENCES, 2021, 15 (12): : 3180 - 3182
  • [24] Comparative evaluation of I-gel vs. endotracheal intubation for adequacy of ventilation in pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries
    Kohli, Megha
    Wadhawan, Sonia
    Bhadoria, Poonam
    Ratan, Simmi K.
    JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2019, 35 (01) : 30 - 35
  • [25] Observation of ventilation effects of I-gel™, Supreme™ and Ambu AuraOnce™ with respiratory dynamics monitoring in small children
    Gu, Zhiqing
    Jin, Quanying
    Liu, Junjun
    Chen, Lianhua
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MONITORING AND COMPUTING, 2017, 31 (05) : 1035 - 1041
  • [26] To Compare the Frequency of Postoperative Sore Throat with I-Gel Versus Laryngeal Mask Airway in patients undergoing General Surgery under General Anesthesia
    Kamal, Muhammad Junaid Ahmed
    Zaheer, Baber
    Durrani, Naveed Ahmed
    Ahmad, Khaleel
    Tabassam, Sumara
    Rashid, Zakariya
    Nishat, Mufassar
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL & HEALTH SCIENCES, 2021, 15 (12): : 3232 - 3235
  • [27] COMPARISON OF SUPRAGLOTTIC AIRWAY DEVICE I-GEL WITH CLASSIC LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY AND PROSEAL LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY FOR SHORT SURGICAL PROCEDURES
    Gandhi, Monika
    Arora, K. K.
    Sharma, Akansha
    JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION OF MEDICAL AND DENTAL SCIENCES-JEMDS, 2018, 7 (18): : 2222 - 2226
  • [28] Fiberoptic intubation of severely obese patients through supraglottic airway: A prospective, randomized trial of the Ambu® AuraGain™ laryngeal mask vs the i-gel™ airway
    Moser, Berthold
    Keller, Christian
    Audige, Laurent
    Dave, Mital H.
    Bruppacher, Heinz R.
    ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2019, 63 (02) : 187 - 194
  • [29] Intraocular pressure and haemodynamic responses to insertion of the i-gel, laryngeal mask airway or endotracheal tube
    Ismail, Salah A.
    Bisher, Neama A.
    Kandil, Hazem W.
    Mowafi, Hany A.
    Atawia, Hayam A.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2011, 28 (06) : 443 - 448
  • [30] Safety and Limitation of the I-gel Laryngeal mask airway in the Lithotomy Position. An Observational study
    Kamel, Walid Y.
    Haggag, Addham Magdy
    AIN SHAMS JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2024, 16 (01)