Performance of the Pediatric-sized i-gel Compared with the Ambu AuraOnce Laryngeal Mask in Anesthetized and Ventilated Children

Author:

Theiler Lorenz G.1,Kleine-Brueggeney Maren2,Luepold Barbara3,Stucki Franziska4,Seiler Stefan4,Urwyler Natalie5,Greif Robert6

Affiliation:

1. Attending Anesthesiologist, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, Inselspital, University Hospital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland, and Assistant Professor of Clinical Anesthesiology, Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Medicine and Pain Therapy, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.

2. Resident, Anesthesiology, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, Inselspital, University Hospital Bern, University of Bern, and Senior Fellow, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

3. Research Fellow.

4. Attending Anesthesiologist, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, Inselspital, University Hospital Bern, University of Bern.

5. Attending Anesthesiologist, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, Inselspital, University Hospital Bern, University of Bern, and Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.

6. Professor of Anesthesiology, Director Peripheral Anesthesia Division, Director Medical Education, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Therapy, Inselspital, University Hospital Bern, University of Bern.

Abstract

Background This prospective, randomized, controlled trial compares the performance of the pediatric i-gel (Intersurgical Ltd., Wokingham, United Kingdom) with the Ambu AuraOnce laryngeal mask (Ambu A/S, Ballerup, Denmark) in anesthetized and ventilated children. Methods With ethics committee approval and written informed consent, the authors included 208 children, aged 0-17 yr, scheduled for elective day-surgery under general anesthesia. The primary outcome variable was oropharyngeal leak pressure. Other outcome variables were first-attempt and overall success, time to sufficient ventilation, and adverse events. Results Demographic data did not differ between groups. The leak pressure of the i-gel was significantly higher than the leak pressure of the Ambu (mean ± SD: 22 ± 5 cm H₂O vs. 19 ± 3, P < 0.01). First-attempt success was 91% for the i-gel and 93% for the Ambu (P = 0.50). Overall success was 93% for the i-gel versus 98% for the Ambu (P = 0.10). Successfully inserted i-gels needed to be secured by taping in place to ensure the seal in 44% (0% with the Ambu, P < 0.01). Insertion was faster with the Ambu (24 ± 8 s vs. 27 ± 11, P = 0.02). There were no major side effects with either device. Conclusions The leak pressure of the i-gel was statistically but not clinically significantly higher than the leak pressure of the Ambu. Time to insertion was longer with the i-gel. Both airway devices are suitable for positive pressure ventilation with high success rates in infants and children. Because the i-gel is prone to sliding out, it must be taped in place to avoid loss of the airway.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Reference27 articles.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3