Cited 0 times in Scipus Cited Count

Comparison of the i-gel with the AuraGain laryngeal mask airways in patients with a simulated cervical immobilization: a randomized controlled trial

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorHur, M-
dc.contributor.authorChoi, S-
dc.contributor.authorRow, HS-
dc.contributor.authorKim, TK-
dc.date.accessioned2022-11-23T07:33:06Z-
dc.date.available2022-11-23T07:33:06Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.issn0375-9393-
dc.identifier.urihttp://repository.ajou.ac.kr/handle/201003/22906-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: The use of second generation supraglottic airway devices is recommended for airway rescue in failed tracheal intubation. This study was performed to compare the clinical performance of the i-gel with that of the AuraGain in patients with simulated cervical immobilization. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized controlled trial in 104 patients undergoing general anesthesia from June to September 2018 at the Seoul National University Hospital. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either the i-gel or the AuraGain device. A difficult airway was simulated using a cervical collar limiting the mouth opening and neck movement. The primary outcome was the initial oropharyngeal leak pressure. RESULTS: The rate of successful insertion at the first attempt was 92.3% for the i-gel and 86% for the AuraGain. There were no significant differences in the initial and 5-min oropharyngeal leak pressures between the i-gel and the AuraGain (21+/-4 vs. 22+/-5 cmH2O, P=0.229; and 22+/-5 vs. 23+/-5 cmH2O, P=0.308, respectively). The time to successful device insertion was shorter (20 [16-23] vs. 25 [20-41] s, P<0.001) and device insertion was easier (P<0.001) in the i-gel group than in the AuraGain group. The blood staining of the device was more frequently observed in the AuraGain (3 [5.8%] vs. 12 [23.5%] patients, P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The i-gel and the AuraGain showed comparable oropharyngeal leak pressures and success rates in the first attempt in patients with simulated cervical immobilization. However, the i-gel was easier to insert and required less time for insertion than the AuraGain.-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.subject.MESHAnesthesia, General-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHIntubation, Intratracheal-
dc.subject.MESHLaryngeal Masks-
dc.subject.MESHNeck-
dc.subject.MESHProspective Studies-
dc.titleComparison of the i-gel with the AuraGain laryngeal mask airways in patients with a simulated cervical immobilization: a randomized controlled trial-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.pmid32251570-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.minervamedica.it/index2.t?show=R02Y2020N07A0727-
dc.subject.keywordLaryngeal masks-
dc.subject.keywordAnesthesia, general-
dc.subject.keywordAirway management-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorHur, M-
dc.type.localJournal Papers-
dc.identifier.doi10.23736/S0375-9393.20.14237-8-
dc.citation.titleMinerva anestesiologica-
dc.citation.volume86-
dc.citation.number7-
dc.citation.date2020-
dc.citation.startPage727-
dc.citation.endPage735-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationMinerva anestesiologica, 86(7). : 727-735, 2020-
dc.embargo.liftdate9999-12-31-
dc.embargo.terms9999-12-31-
dc.identifier.eissn1827-1596-
dc.relation.journalidJ003759393-
Appears in Collections:
Journal Papers > School of Medicine / Graduate School of Medicine > Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

qrcode

해당 아이템을 이메일로 공유하기 원하시면 인증을 거치시기 바랍니다.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse