Bibliographic Details
| Title: |
Comparison of the Air-Q®sp versus the LMA® Supreme™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery: a single-blind, randomized controlled trial. |
| Authors: |
Chan Noh1,2, Seounghun Lee3, Jiyong Lee1,2, Boohwi Hong1,2, Woosuk Chung1,2, Youngkwon Ko1,2, Yoon-Hee Kim1,2, Chahyun Oh1,2 5chahyun@cnuh.co.kr, Sun Yeul Lee1,2 neoquack@cnuh.co.kr |
| Source: |
Signa Vitae. Aug2024, Vol. 20 Issue 8, p13-20. 8p. |
| Subject Terms: |
*LAPAROSCOPIC surgery, *LARYNGEAL masks, *SURGERY, *GENERAL anesthesia, *CONFIDENCE intervals, *GYNECOLOGIC surgery |
| Abstract: |
Previous studies have reported the clinical utility of the LMA® Supreme™ (LMA Supreme) in laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia, but there has been limited research on the effectiveness of the self-pressurized Air-Q® (Air-Q) in this clinical context. This study assessed the clinical performance of the Air-Q in laparoscopic gynecological surgeries by comparing its effectiveness, particularly in terms of oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), against that of the LMA Supreme. Fifty-two female patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists class I--II) scheduled for laparoscopic gynecologic surgery were randomly assigned to either the Air-Q group or the LMA Supreme group. The primary outcome was OLP, and secondary outcomes included the number of attempts required for device insertion, the time taken for insertion, difficulty of insertion, leakage rate, and complications associated with supraglottic airway device use. The Air-Q group exhibited a significantly lower OLP compared to the LMA Supreme group (19.5 ± 4.1 cmH2O vs. 23.2 ± 6.0 cmH2O, p = 0.011), with a mean difference of -3.8 cmH2O (95% confidence interval, -6.6 to -0.9 cmH2O). Analysis of secondary outcomes revealed no significant differences between the two groups. LMA Supreme could be preferred over Air-Q for airway management during general anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery primarily due to its higher OLP. However, the Air-Q remains a viable alternative, exhibiting no significant differences in leakage rates compared to LMA Supreme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of Signa Vitae is the property of Pharmamed Mado Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| Database: |
Academic Search Complete |
