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
  • [31] A randomised crossover trial comparing the i-gel supraglottic airway and classic laryngeal mask airway
    Janakiraman, C.
    Chethan, D. B.
    Wilkes, A. R.
    Stacey, M. R.
    Goodwin, N.
    ANAESTHESIA, 2009, 64 (06) : 674 - 678
  • [32] A randomized comparison of the i-gel and the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in pediatric patients: performance and fiberoptic findings
    Fukuhara, Aya
    Okutani, Ryu
    Oda, Yutaka
    JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA, 2013, 27 (01) : 1 - 6
  • [33] A randomized comparison of the i-gel and the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in pediatric patients: performance and fiberoptic findings
    Aya Fukuhara
    Ryu Okutani
    Yutaka Oda
    Journal of Anesthesia, 2013, 27 : 1 - 6
  • [34] Comparative study of fiber-optic guided tracheal intubation through intubating laryngeal mask airway LMA Fastrach. and i-gel in adult paralyzed patients
    Sood, Suvidha
    Saxena, Anupriya
    Thakur, Anil
    Chahar, Shikha
    SAUDI JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2019, 13 (04) : 290 - 294
  • [35] Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure of I-gel™ and Blockbuster™ laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized pediatric patients
    Selvin, Caren Candace
    Singariya, Geeta
    Bihani, Pooja
    Kamal, Manoj
    Paliwal, Naveen
    Ujwal, Shobha
    ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 2023, 18 (01): : 51 - 56
  • [36] Crossover Comparison of the Laryngeal Mask Supreme™ and the i-gel™ in Simulated Difficult Airway Scenario in Anesthetized Patients
    Theiler, Lorenz G.
    Kleine-Brueggeney, Maren
    Kaiser, Dagmar
    Urwyler, Natalie
    Luyet, Cedric
    Vogt, Andreas
    Greif, Robert
    Unibe, M. M. E.
    ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2009, 111 (01) : 55 - 62
  • [37] A comparative evaluation of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway, I-gel and Supreme laryngeal mask airway in adult patients undergoing elective surgery: A randomised trial
    Singh, Anisha
    Bhalotra, Anju R.
    Anand, Raktima
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2018, 62 (11) : 858 - 864
  • [38] A prospective study to evaluate and compare laryngeal mask airway ProSeal and i-gel airway in the prone position
    Taxak, Susheela
    Gopinath, Ajith
    Saini, Savita
    Bansal, Teena
    Ahlawat, Mangal Singh
    Bala, Manju
    SAUDI JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2015, 9 (04) : 446 - 450
  • [39] I-gel vs cuffed tracheal tube during volume controlled ventilation in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy
    Ibrahim, Mohamed
    Ragab, Ashraf
    ElShamaa, Hossam
    EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2011, 27 (01) : 7 - 11
  • [40] Comparison of the I-Gel and the Laryngeal Mask Airway Proseal during General Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Park, Sun Kyung
    Choi, Geun Joo
    Choi, Yun Suk
    Ahn, Eun Jin
    Kang, Hyun
    PLOS ONE, 2015, 10 (03):