Dataset Information

A prospective, randomized comparison of the LMA-protector™ and i-gel™ in paralyzed, anesthetized patients.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:In the present study, we compare the LMA-Protector™ and the i-gel™ in terms of adequacy of the airway seal, insertion time, ease and accuracy of insertion, and the incidence of postoperative sore throat. METHODS:In 110 anesthetized and paralyzed adult patients, the i-gel™ (n?=?55) or the LMA-Protector™ (n?=?55) was inserted. The primary outcome was airway leak pressure. The secondary outcomes included the first-attempt success rate, insertion time, ease and accuracy of the device insertion, ease of gastric tube placement, blood staining on the device after removal, and incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat. RESULTS:The airway leak pressure was higher with the LMA-Protector™ than with the i-gel™ (31 [7] cmH2O vs. 27 [6] cmH2O, respectively; P?=?0.016). Insertion time was longer with the LMA-Protector™ than with the i-gel™ (27 [16] sec vs. 19 [16] sec, respectively, P?

SUBMITTER: Chang JE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6610917 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A prospective, randomized comparison of the LMA-protector™ and i-gel™ in paralyzed, anesthetized patients.

Chang Jee-Eun JE Kim Hyerim H Lee Jung-Man JM Min Seong-Won SW Won Dongwook D Jun Kwanghoon K Hwang Jin-Young JY

BMC anesthesiology 20190704 1

<h4>Background</h4>In the present study, we compare the LMA-Protector™ and the i-gel™ in terms of adequacy of the airway seal, insertion time, ease and accuracy of insertion, and the incidence of postoperative sore throat.<h4>Methods</h4>In 110 anesthetized and paralyzed adult patients, the i-gel™ (n = 55) or the LMA-Protector™ (n = 55) was inserted. The primary outcome was airway leak pressure. The secondary outcomes included the first-attempt success rate, insertion time, ease and accuracy of ...[more]

PMID: 31272379

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDuring laparoscopic gynecological surgery, increased peak airway pressure (PAWP) can cause airway leak upon ventilation with the LMA® ProSeal™. We hypothesized that compared with the use of volume-controlled ventilation (VCV), the use of the AutoFlow® mode would decrease PAWP and airway leak during laparoscopic gynecological surgery with LMA ProSeal.MethodsThis single-center, randomized, controlled trial allocated 80 adult women undergoing elective laparoscopic gynecological surgery to one of two groups, namely, the AutoFlow group or the VCV group. Ventilation settings for both groups were 8 ml/kg of tidal volume and 5 cmH2O of positive end-expiratory pressure, and respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain end-tidal carbon dioxide at 35-40 mmHg. Airway leak, PAWP, and other ventilatory parameters and vital signs were recorded at four timepoints (1, 1 min after insertion of the gastric tube; 2, 2 min after intravenous administration of rocuronium 0.6-0.8 mg/kg; 3, 1 min after initiation of pneumoperitoneum; and 4, 1 min after changing to the Trendelenburg position). The primary outcome was PAWP during pneumoperitoneum and in the Trendelenburg position, whereas the secondary outcomes included PAWP at other timepoints and airway leak development. We used the Mann-Whitney U test for PAWP and Fisher's exact test for comparing airway leak among the groups.ResultsData from 40 patients in the AutoFlow group and 39 in the VCV group were used for analysis. PAWP at pneumoperitoneum pressure and in the Trendelenburg position was significantly lower in the AutoFlow group than in the VCV group [median (interquartile range), 16 (15-18) cmH2O vs. 18 (17-19) cmH2O; P < 0.001]. Similarly, patients in the AutoFlow group showed lower PAWP at the other three timepoints measured. Airway leak occurred in four patients in the AutoFlow group and in two patients in the VCV group; however, this incidence was not significantly different (P = 0.68).ConclusionsEven though AutoFlow ventilation decreased PAWP, it did not reduce the incidence of airway leak compared with VCV during laparoscopic gynecological surgery with the LMA ProSeal.Trial registrationUMIN Clinical Trials Registry, identifier UMIN000023173 .

Dataset Information

A prospective, randomized comparison of the LMA-protector™ and i-gel™ in paralyzed, anesthetized patients.

Publications

A prospective, randomized comparison of the LMA-protector™ and i-gel™ in paralyzed, anesthetized patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure