Literature DB >> 25559870

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

Min-Soo Kim1, Jae Hoon Lee, Sang Won Han, Young Jae Im, Hyo Jong Kang, Jeong-Rim Lee.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Supraglottic 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. AIM: The 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.
METHODS: Eighty children, 1-108 months of age, 7-30 kg 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, 10 min after initial assessment, and after completion of surgery. We also assessed insertion parameters and complications.
RESULTS: Insertion 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 10 min 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.
CONCLUSION: Our 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.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  airway management; anesthesia; children; clinical trial; laryngeal mask airway; pediatrics

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25559870     DOI: 10.1111/pan.12609

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Anaesth        ISSN: 1155-5645            Impact factor:   2.556


  14 in total

Review 1.  [Interdisciplinary consensus statement on alternative airway management with supraglottic airway devices in pediatric emergency medicine: Laryngeal mask is state of the art].

Authors:  J Keil; P Jung; A Schiele; B Urban; A Parsch; B Matsche; C Eich; K Becke; B Landsleitner; S G Russo; M Bernhard; T Nicolai; F Hoffmann
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 2.  Comparative Efficacy of the Air-Q Intubating Laryngeal Airway during General Anesthesia in Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Eun Jin Ahn; Geun Joo Choi; Hyun Kang; Chong Wha Baek; Yong Hun Jung; Young Cheol Woo; Si Ra Bang
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2016-06-23       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Comparison of the Disposable Streamlined Liner of the Pharynx Airway and the Disposable I-gel in Anaesthetized, Paralyzed Adults: A Randomized Prospective Study.

Authors:  Khaled El-Radaideh; Ala A Alhowary; Diab Bani Hani
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2015-12-01

4.  Comparison of the Supreme™ and ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airways in infants: a prospective randomised clinical study.

Authors:  Sibel Oba; Hacer Sebnem Turk; Canan Tulay Isil; Huseyin Erdogan; Pinar Sayin; Ali Ihsan Dokucu
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 2.217

5.  A randomized comparison of volume- and pressure-controlled ventilation in children with the i-gel: Effects on peak inspiratory pressure, oropharyngeal leak pressure, and gastric insufflation.

Authors:  Jin Ha Park; Ji Young Kim; Kyoungun Park; Hae Keum Kil
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 1.889

6.  A Comparison between the i-gel® and air-Q® Supraglottic Airway Devices Used for the Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia with Muscle Relaxation.

Authors:  Nilofar Massoudi; Mohammad Fathi; Navid Nooraei; Alireza Salehi
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-11-18       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  A comparison of supraglottic devices in pediatric patients.

Authors:  Senthil G Krishna; Faizaan Syed; Mohammed Hakim; Mumin Hakim; Dmitry Tumin; Giorgio C Veneziano; Joseph D Tobias
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2018-10-01

8.  Supraglottic Airway Devices for Elective Pediatric Anesthesia: I-gel versus Air-Q, Which is the Best?

Authors:  Rami Mounir Wahba; Milad Zekry Ragaei; Ayman Anis Metry; George Mikhael Nakhla
Journal:  Anesth Essays Res       Date:  2021-03-22

Review 9.  Standard versus Rotation Technique for Insertion of Supraglottic Airway Devices: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Jin Ha Park; Jong Seok Lee; Sang Beom Nam; Jin Wu Ju; Min Soo Kim
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 2.759

10.  Pediatric supraglottic airway devices in clinical practice: A prospective observational study.

Authors:  Maren Kleine-Brueggeney; Anne Gottfried; Sabine Nabecker; Robert Greif; Malte Book; Lorenz Theiler
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2017-09-02       Impact factor: 2.217

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.