7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The air-Q(®) intubating laryngeal airway vs the LMA-ProSeal(TM) : a prospective, randomised trial of airway seal pressure.

      Anaesthesia

      Adult, Female, Humans, Intubation, Intratracheal, instrumentation, Laryngeal Masks, Male, Prospective Studies, Middle Aged, Pressure

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We performed a prospective, open-label, randomised controlled trial comparing the air-Q(®) against the LMA-ProSeal™ in adults undergoing general anaesthesia. One hundred subjects (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1-3) presenting for elective, outpatient surgery were randomly assigned to 52 air-Q(®) and 48 ProSeal devices. The primary study endpoint was airway seal pressure. Oropharyngolaryngeal morbidity was assessed secondarily. Mean (SD) airway seal pressures for the air-Q(®) and ProSeal were 30 (7) cmH (2) O and 30 (6) cmH(2) O, respectively (p = 0.47). Postoperative sore throat was more common with the air-Q(®) (46% vs 38%, p = 0.03) as was pain on swallowing (30% vs 5%, p = 0.01). In conclusion, the air-Q(®) performs well as a primary airway during the maintenance of general anaesthesia with an airway seal pressure similar to that of the ProSeal, but with a higher incidence of postoperative oropharyngolaryngeal complaints. © 2011 The Authors. Anaesthesia © 2011 The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          21880031
          3358348
          10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06863.x

          Comments

          Comment on this article