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
  • [41] Effect of classical laryngeal mask or I-gel use on otolaryngeal system in ambulatory inhalation general anesthesia: A prospective study
    Saylan, Sedat
    Cobanoglu, Hatice Bengu Yaldiz
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2024, 40 (10) : 2299 - 2304
  • [42] Comparison of laryngeal mask airway Supreme and laryngeal mask airway Pro-Seal for controlled ventilation during general anaesthesia in adult patients Systematic review with meta-analysis
    Maitra, Souvik
    Khanna, Puneet
    Baidya, Dalim Kumar
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2014, 31 (05) : 266 - 273
  • [43] A randomised trial to compare i-gel and ProSeal (TM) laryngeal mask airway for airway management in paediatric patients
    Nirupa, R.
    Gombar, Satinder
    Ahuja, Vanita
    Sharma, Preeti
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2016, 60 (10) : 726 - 731
  • [44] Comparison of the airway complications of subtypes of laryngeal mask airway and i-gel in child patients under general anaesthesia: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised control trials
    Liu, Jieting
    Xu, Xiaonan
    Li, Muyang
    Cai, Runjin
    Yang, Kehu
    BMJ OPEN, 2020, 10 (02):
  • [45] REMIFENTANIL REQUIREMENT FOR CLASSIC™, FASTRACH™ AND I-GEL™ LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY INSERTION WITH TARGET-CONTROLLED PROPOFOL INFUSION
    Can, Ozlem S.
    Ozcelik, Menekse
    Guclu, Cigdem Y.
    Oztuna, Derya
    Alanoglu, Zekeriyya
    Kecik, Yuksel
    ACTA MEDICA MEDITERRANEA, 2013, 29 (04): : 639 - 646
  • [46] Randomized crossover comparison of the laryngeal mask airway classic with i-gel laryngeal mask airway in the management of difficult airway in post burn neck contracture patients
    Singh, Jeevan
    Yadav, Manohar Kumar
    Marahatta, Sujan Babu
    Shrestha, Bikash Lal
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2012, 56 (04) : 348 - 352
  • [47] I-GEL LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY: AN EFFECTIVE SUPRAGLOTTIC AIRWAY FOR SPONTANEOUS BREATHING GENERAL ANESTHESIA IN NON-INTUBATED UNIPORTAL THORACOSCOPIC RESECTION
    Jiang, Shan
    Yin, Fei
    Wang, Mei-qing
    Cui, Yan
    Sun, Yang
    ACTA MEDICA MEDITERRANEA, 2019, 35 (06): : 3127 - 3130
  • [48] Comparison of remifentanil EC50 for facilitating i-gel and laryngeal mask airway insertion with propofol anesthesia
    Choi, Jong Bum
    Kwak, Hyun Jeong
    Lee, Kyung Cheon
    Lee, Se Ryeon
    Lee, Sook Young
    Kim, Jong Yeop
    JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA, 2016, 30 (03) : 377 - 383
  • [49] A randomized controlled study to compare oropharyngeal leak pressure between I-gel™ and laryngeal mask airway supreme™ in children in lateral position under general anesthesia
    Kundal, Raksha
    Puri, Kriti
    Agrawal, Garima
    Singh, Ranju
    Pandey, Maitree
    AIN SHAMS JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2023, 15 (01)
  • [50] A prospective, randomized comparison of the LMA-protector™ and i-gel™ in paralyzed, anesthetized patients
    Chang, Jee-Eun
    Kim, Hyerim
    Lee, Jung-Man
    Min, Seong-Won
    Won, Dongwook
    Jun, Kwanghoon
    Hwang, Jin-Young
    BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2019, 19 (1)