A randomised comparison of the self-pressurised air-QTM intubating laryngeal airway with the LMA UniqueTM in children*

Comparative evaluation of self-pressurized Air-Q® and Proseal™ LMA® in patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia: A randomized clinical trial

Background and Aims

Intra-cuff pressure of Air-Q self-pressurized laryngeal airways (Air-Q SP) balances airway pressure and adapts to patient's pharyngeal and periglottic structures, thus improves oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP).This study was performed to compare efficacy of Air-Q SP with Proseal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) in patients undergoing elective surgery.

Material and Methods

The study design was prospective, randomized and controlled. Ninety patients were randomly assigned to Air-Q SP or PLMA group. All patients were premedicated and shifted to operation theatre. Monitoring was instituted. After securing IV-line, induction with inj. Morphine + Propofol, relaxation with inj. Vecuronium was done. Supraglottic was inserted according to group allocation. Outcome measures were OLP, fibreoptic view of larynx, success rate, device insertion parameters, haemodynamic and respiratory parameters and post-operative laryngopharyngeal complications. Neostigmine + glycopyrrolate were given, device was extubated.

Results

All supraglottic airway devices (SADs) were successfully placed in two attempts. The mean initial OLP, OLP at 10 minutes, and device insertion time were significantly lower in Air-Q SP group. Fiber-optic laryngeal view grading was significantly better with Air-Q SP. No significant difference was observed with respect to rate of successful insertion in first attempt, ease of insertion, and manipulations required. The hemodynamic/respiratory parameters and post-operative sore throat in the two both groups were similar.

Conclusions

Proseal LMA has a higher OLP than Air-Q SP but average insertion time was better, and fiber-optic grading of laryngeal view was shorter with Air-Q SP. However, Air-Q SP and Proseal LMA were both effective for lung ventilation.

Comparative evaluation of Air-Q blocker and Proseal laryngeal mask airway in patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia: A randomised controlled trial

Background and Aims:

The Air-Q blocker (Cook gas LLC, Mercury Medical, Clearwater, FL, USA) is a relatively new supraglottic airway device (SAD) with capability to serve as a conduit for intubation. As there is limited data on Air-Q blocker, the present study was performed to compare the efficacy of Air-Q blocker and Proseal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) in patients undergoing elective surgery.

Methods:

A total of 90 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II patients were randomly allocated to Air-Q blocker or PLMA group. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), insertion success, insertion time, ease of orogastric tube (OGT) insertion, fibreoptic visualisation of the glottis, haemodynamic and ventilation parameters, and complications at emergence and postoperatively were investigated.

Results:

OLPs were higher in PLMA group as compared to Air-Q blocker group (P = 0.002). Still, the OLP (27.5 ± 5.8 cm H₂O) was clinically effective in Air-Q blocker group. The mean time for successful insertion was significantly shorter for Air-Q blocker than PLMA (P = 0.019). The number of attempts to insert both the devices was comparable (P ≥ 0.05). Air-Q blocker provided a significantly better fibreoptic score than PLMA (P = 0.038). The two groups were comparable in terms of ease of OGT insertion, haemodynamics and ventilation parameters, and complications at emergence and postoperatively.

Conclusions:

Air-Q blocker provides a clinically effective OLP though PLMA provides a slightly better sealing function in patients undergoing laparoscopic and non-laparoscopic surgeries under general anaesthesia requiring neuromuscular blockade. Air-Q blocker has shorter insertion time and a better fibreoptic view of glottis as compared to PLMA.

Clinical performance of Ambu AuraGainTM versus i-gelTM in anesthetized children: a prospective, randomized controlled trial

Background

Ambu AuraGain and i-gel have different characteristics in design each other. However, few reports evaluate which device has more benefits for ventilation in children undergoing paralyzed general anesthesia. This prospective, randomized controlled trial compared the clinical performance AuraGain and i-gel in anesthetized children.

Methods

Children aged between 1 month and 7 years undergoing elective surgery were randomly assigned to the AuraGain and i-gel groups. The primary outcome was initial oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP). Secondary outcomes were OLP at 10 min post-insertion, first-attempt and total insertion success rates, number of attempts and ease of gastric suction catheter placement, peak inspiratory pressure, fiberoptic bronchoscopic view score, ventilation quality, requirement of additional manipulation post-insertion, and complications.

Results

Data of 93 patients were analyzed. The initial OLPs of the AuraGain and i-gel were 27.5 ± 7.7 and 25.0 ± 8.0 cmH₂O, respectively (P = 0.130). The OLP was significantly increased 10 min post-insertion in both groups. The initial success rates of the AuraGain and i-gel insertion were comparable. Suction catheter placement via the gastric port was easier (P = 0.018) and fiberoptic bronchoscopic view was better with the AuraGain (P < 0.001). The i-gel required additional manipulations post-insertion (P = 0.038). The incidence of complications during the emergence period was 10.8% for the i-gel^TM and 2.2% for the AuraGain (P = 0.1)

Conclusions

OLP is comparable between AuraGain and i-gel. The AuraGain would be more favorable than the i-gel^TM for use in pediatric patients under general anesthesia considering other outcomes.

Prospective, Randomized Comparison of the i-gel and the Self-Pressurized air-Q Intubating Laryngeal Airway in Elderly Anesthetized Patients

BACKGROUND

Age-related changes in upper airway anatomy may affect the overall performance of supraglottic airways significantly. The clinical performance of the i-gel and the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airways with noninflatable cuffs for elderly populations remains unknown, unlike in children. Thus, we performed a prospective, randomized comparison of these 2 supraglottic airways in elderly patients undergoing general anesthesia.

METHODS

We recruited 100 patients, 65-90 years of age, who were scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia with muscle relaxation. The enrolled patients were allocated to the i-gel or self-pressurized air-Q group. We assessed oropharyngeal leak pressure as the primary outcome and fiberoptic view after placement and fixation of the airway and at 10 minutes after the initial assessment. The fiberoptic view was scored using a 5-point scale as follows: vocal cords not visible; vocal cords and anterior epiglottis visible, >50% visual obstruction of epiglottis to vocal cords; vocal cords and anterior epiglottis visible, <50% visual obstruction of epiglottis to vocal cords; vocal cords and posterior epiglottis visible; and vocal cords visible. We also investigated success rate and ease of insertion, insertion time, and manipulations during insertion as insertion variables, complications during maintenance and emergence periods, and postoperative pharyngolaryngeal complications including sore throat, dysphagia, and dysphonia.

RESULTS

After assessing for eligibility, 48 patients were allocated to each group. Oropharyngeal leak pressures were significantly higher in the i-gel group than in the self-pressurized air-Q group (P < .001) at the 2 measurement points. The raw mean difference at initial assessment and the median difference after 10 minutes were 5.5 cm H2O (95% confidence interval, 3.3-7.6 cm H2O) and 5.0 (95% confidence interval, 2.0-7.0 cm H2O), respectively. The initial scores of fiberoptic view were similar in the 2 groups. However, the self-pressurized air-Q supraglottic airway provided a significantly improved fiberoptic view at 10 minutes after initial assessment (P = .030). We found no statistically significant differences in insertion variables and complications between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The i-gel provided better sealing function than the self-pressurized air-Q supraglottic airway according to the high oropharyngeal leak pressures in elderly patients during general anesthesia. The self-pressurized air-Q supraglottic airway had improved fiberoptic views in elderly patients during general anesthesia.

Comparison of laryngeal mask airway supremeTM as non-inflatable cuff device and self-pressurized air-QTM in children: Randomized controlled non-inferiority study

BACKGROUND

Supraglottic airway (SGA) device with non-inflatable cuff reduce the airway complications associated with cuff hyperinflation. The aim of the study is to determine whether the default setting of Supreme is as effective as the non-inflatable cuff devices. The oropharyngeal leak pressure was measured and compared between the Supreme and Air-Q, a typical non-inflatable cuff device. We hypothesized that the default setting of Supreme is non-inferior to the the Air-Q self-pressurized (SP) in respect to the oropharyngeal leak pressure.

METHODS

Eighty-four patients aged 1 to 7 years who were scheduled for general anesthesia, participated in the study. The patients were randomly assigned to Supreme group (n = 41) or Air-Q SP group (n = 43). We considered that the primary outcome, oropharyngeal leak pressure of Supreme group would be non-inferior to the Air-Q SP group, within 3 cmH2O. Other outcomes included tidal volume loss, difficulty of insertion, insertion time, and complications.

RESULTS

The oropharyngeal leak pressure of the Supreme and Air-Q SP was 19.9 ± 4.1 cm H2O and 17.4 ± 2.9 cm H2O, respectively. The mean differences of 2 devices (Air-Q SP-Supreme) were -2.5 cm H2O, (95% confidence interval [-4.0 to -0.9], P = .002). The upper CI was smaller than the non-inferiorty margin (3 cm H2O). This result suggested that the default setting of Supreme was superior to the Air-Q SP with respect to the oropharyngeal leak pressure. However, there were no significant differences in tidal volume loss over time, ease of device insertion score, insertion time, and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The Supreme can be used in the default setting in pediatric patients accordingly in terms of tolerable leak pressure and the stability for mechanical ventilation compared with Air-Q SP.

A comparison of supraglottic devices in pediatric patients

Background

When managing patients with a difficult airway, supraglottic airways (SGAs) have been used as rescue devices or to serve as a conduit for endotracheal intubation. The current study compares various clinical outcomes, including the bronchoscopic view of the glottis when using 2 SGAs, the Air-Q^® laryngeal mask airway (LMA) and the i-gel^® SGA, in pediatric patients.

Methods

Patients ≤18 years of age were prospectively randomized to receive either the Air-Q^® LMA or the i-gel^® SGA. Following SGA placement, a flexible fiberoptic bronchoscope was inserted through the SGA to visualize the glottis. Time taken to obtain the bronchoscopic view and place the SGA, and the ability to seal the airway at 20 cmH₂O were compared. The bronchoscopic view obtained was graded as follows: 1) glottic aperture seen completely; 2) glottic aperture seen partially with visual obstruction <50%; 3) glottic aperture seen, but visual obstruction >50%; and 4) glottic aperture not seen.

Results

Fifty patients were enrolled and 48 (22/26 male/female) were included in the analysis. Median age was 13 years (IQR: 7, 16) and median weight was 49 kg (IQR: 25, 70). The Air-Q^® LMA and i-gel^® SGA groups did not differ in device placement time (median of 19 vs 21 seconds; 95% CI of difference in medians: - 2 to 7; P=0.331), the time to achieve fiberoptic view of the glottis (median of 25 vs 21 seconds; 95% CI of difference: - 9 to 8; P=0.489) or the grade of the bronchoscopic view of the airway. Eight Air-Q^® and 6 i-gel^® supraglottic devices sealed the airway at 20 cmH₂O.

Discussion

The time required for successful placement of the SGA, the time required for bronchoscopic view, and the quality of bronchoscopic view through the Air-Q^® LMA and the i-gel^® SGA did not differ.

Flexion decreases the ventilation quality of the Ambu® AuraGain™ laryngeal mask in paralysed children: A prospective randomised crossover study

BACKGROUND

The influence of different head and neck positions on ventilation with the Ambu® AuraGain™ remains unevaluated in children. This study assessed the influence of different head and neck positions on ventilation with the AuraGain™ in paediatric patients.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomised crossover study, children ≤7 years of age who were scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia were enrolled. An AuraGain™ was placed in all patients; mechanical ventilation was performed using a volume-controlled mode with a tidal volume of 10 mL/kg. Respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain a ETCO2 of 35-40 mm Hg. The oropharyngeal leak pressure, expiratory tidal volume, peak inspiratory pressure, ventilation score and fibreoptic bronchoscopic view score were assessed for the neutral head and neck position, and then for the flexed, extended and rotated head and neck positions in a random order.

RESULTS

Compared with the neutral position, the oropharyngeal leak pressure increased in the flexed position (P < .001), and decreased in the extended (P = .014) and rotated position (P = .002). The expiratory tidal volume and ventilation score were significantly reduced during flexion (all P < .005), and were comparable among the neutral, extended and rotated positions. The fibreoptic score improved in the extended and rotated position (all P < .001). Only the flexion ventilation score was lower compared with the neutral position (P = .014).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically, the flexed head and neck positions negatively affected ventilation due to obstruction of the airway. Ventilation with AuraGain™ can be effectively performed with the head and neck in the neutral, extended and rotated position in paediatric patients.

Self-pressurized air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway versus the LMA® Classic™: a randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

The self-pressurized air-Q® (air-Q SP) intubating laryngeal airway is a relatively new supraglottic airway (SGA) device. The intracuff pressure of air-Q dynamically equilibrates with the airway pressure and adjusts to the patient's pharyngeal and periglottic anatomy, potentially providing improved airway fit and seal. The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare the clinical performance of air-Q to the LMA® Classic™ SGA.

METHODS

Adult patients requiring general anesthesia for elective surgery were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned to either air-Q SP or the LMA Classic SGA. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (primary endpoint), success rate, insertion features (insertion time, ease of insertion, requirement for device manipulation), sealing function, gastric insufflation, bronchoscopic view, and oropharyngeal complications at device insertion and following its removal (sore throat, dysphagia, dysphonia) were compared.

RESULTS

The mean (standard deviation [SD]) oropharyngeal leak pressure just after insertion was similar in the air-Q SP and LMA [16.8 (4.9) vs 18.6 (5.5) cm H₂O, respectively; mean difference, 1.8 cm H₂O; 95% CI, -0.5 to 4.2; P = 0.13] and did not differ at ten minutes following device insertion. Median [interquartile range (IQR)] peak inspiratory pressure just after insertion was lower in the air-Q SP (11.0 [10.0-13.0] vs 13.0 [11.0-14.0] cmH₂O, median difference, 1.0 cm H₂O; 95% CI, 0.0 to 2.0; P = 0.03) but no difference was observed at ten minutes. The median [IQR] insertion time was faster with the air-Q SP (15.9 [13.6-20.3] sec vs 24 [21.2-27.1] sec; median difference, 8.1 sec; 95% CI, 5.6 to 9.9; P < 0.001) and improved bronchoscopic viewing grade were seen with the air-Q SP immediately after insertion (P < 0.001). No differences between the groups were observed with respect to the rate of successful insertion at first attempt, overall insertion success rate, ease of insertion, and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The air-Q SP had similar leak pressures but a faster insertion time and superior bronchoscopic viewing grade when compared with the LMA Classic. The air-Q SP is a suitable alternative to the LMA Classic in adult patients and may be a superior conduit for tracheal intubation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02206438). Registered 1 August 2014.

A network meta-analysis of the clinical properties of various types of supraglottic airway device in children

We conducted both conventional pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses to compare the clinical properties of supraglottic airway devices in children. We searched six databases for randomised clinical trials. Our primary end-points were oropharyngeal leak pressure, risk of insertion failure at first attempt, and blood staining risk. The risk of device failure, defined as the abandonment of the supraglottic airway device and replacement with a tracheal tube or another device, was also analysed. Sixty-five randomised clinical trials with 5823 participants were identified, involving 16 types of supraglottic airway device. Network meta-analysis showed that the i-gel™, Cobra perilaryngeal airway™ and Proseal laryngeal mask airway (LMA^® -Proseal) showed statistically significant differences in oropharyngeal leak pressure compared with the LMA^® -Classic, with mean differences (95% credible interval, CrI) of 3.6 (1.9-5.8), 4.6 (1.7-7.6) and 3.4 (2.0-4.8) cmH₂ O, respectively. The i-gel was the only device that significantly reduced the risk of blood staining of the device compared with the LMA-Classic, with an odds ratio (95%CrI) of 0.46 (0.22-0.90). The risk (95%CI) of device failure with the LMA-Classic, LMA^® -Unique and LMA-Proseal was 0.36% (0.14-0.92%), 0.49% (0.13-1.8%) and 0.50% (0.23-1.1%), respectively, whereas the risk (95%CI) of the i-gel and PRO-Breathe was higher, at 3.4% (2.5-4.7%) and 6.0% (2.8-12.5%), respectively. The risk, expressed as odds ratio (95%CrI), of insertion failure at first attempt, was higher in patients weighing < 10 kg at 5.1 (1.6-20.1). We conclude that the LMA-Proseal may be the best supraglottic airway device for children as it has a high oropharyngeal leak pressure and a low risk of insertion. Although the i-gel has a high oropharyngeal leak pressure and low risk of blood staining of the device, the risk of device failure should be evaluated before its routine use can be recommended.

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

Air-Q® (air-Q) is a supraglottic airway device which can be used as a guidance of intubation in pediatric as well as in adult patients. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of air-Q compared to other airway devices during general anesthesia in pediatric patients by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 10 studies including 789 patients were included in the final analysis. Compared with other supraglottic airway devices, air-Q showed no evidence for a difference in leakage pressure and insertion time. The ease of insertion was significantly lower than other supraglottic airway devices. The success rate of intubation was significantly lower than other airway devices. However, fiberoptic view was better through the air-Q than other supraglottic airway devices. Therefore, air-Q could be a safe substitute for other airway devices and may provide better fiberoptic bronchoscopic view.

A randomized comparison of pediatric-sized Streamlined Liner of Pharyngeal Airway and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Unique in paralyzed children

BACKGROUND

The pediatric-sized Streamlined Liner of Pharyngeal Airway (SLIPA) is a new supraglottic airway device for children.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical performance of the pediatric-sized SLIPA with the Laryngeal Mask Airway-Unique in paralyzed children under positive pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV).

METHODS

One hundred children, aged 2 months to 12 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II were enrolled and randomly allocated to the SLIPA group or the Laryngeal Mask Airway-Unique group (50 patients in each group). The primary outcome variable was oropharyngeal leak pressure. Other outcome variables were first insertion success rate, insertion time, minor airway interventions required for successful insertion, intraoperative dislodgement, ventilatory data, and perioperative complications.

RESULTS

The insertion characteristics, ventilation data, and perioperative complications were comparable between the two groups. The leak pressure of the SLIPA was significantly higher than that of the Laryngeal Mask Airway-Unique [median (IQR): 25 (22-30) cm H2O vs. 21 (19-26) cm H2O, respectively; mean ± sd: 25.3 ± 4.6 cm H2O vs. 22.6 ± 4.8 cm H2O, respectively; P = 0.006]. The incidence of intraoperative dislodgment was significantly lower in the SLIPA group than in the Laryngeal Mask Airway-Unique group (0 vs. 6 patients, respectively; P = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, both the SLIPA and the Laryngeal Mask Airway-Unique can be used effectively without severe complications in paralyzed children. Additionally, the SLIPA provides a better airway seal and better intraoperative position stability than the Laryngeal Mask Airway-Unique.

Small is the new big: An overview of newer supraglottic airways for children

Almost all supraglottic airways (SGAs) are now available in pediatric sizes. The availability of these smaller sizes, especially in the last five years has brought a marked change in the whole approach to airway management in children. SGAs are now used for laparoscopic surgeries, head and neck surgeries, remote anesthesia; and for ventilation during resuscitation. A large number of reports have described the use of SGAs in difficult airway situations, either as a primary or a rescue airway. Despite this expanded usage, there remains little evidence to support its usage in prolonged surgeries and in the intensive care unit. This article presents an overview of the current options available, suitability of one over the other and reviews the published data relating to each device. In this review, the author also addresses some of the general concerns regarding the use of SGAs and explores newer roles of their use in children.

An update on newer pediatric supraglottic airways with recommendations for clinical use

Supraglottic airways are an established part of routine and emergency pediatric airway management, including use in difficult airways and neonatal resuscitation. With the introduction of newer supraglottic airways in children, efficacy can only be determined by comparing these devices with those that are already well established (laryngeal mask airway Classic and laryngeal mask airway ProSeal). This narrative review aims to present the current literature on these newer supraglottic airways and give recommendations for their use in various clinical scenarios based on the existing evidence.

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

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.

Are new supraglottic airway devices, tracheal tubes and airway viewing devices cost-effective?

Over the past two decades, a plethora of new airway devices has become available to the pediatric anesthetist. While all have the laudable intention of improving patient care and some have proven clinical benefits, these devices are often costly and at times claims of an advantage over current equipment and techniques are marginal. Supraglottic airway devices are used in the majority of pediatric anesthetics delivered in the U.K., and airway-viewing devices provide an alternative for routine intubation as well as an option in the management of the difficult airway. Yet hidden beneath the convenience of the former and the technology of the latter, the impact on basic airway skills with a facemask and the lack of opportunities to fine-tune the core skill of intubation represent an unrecognised and unquantifiable cost. A judgement on this value must be factored into the absolute purchase cost and any potential benefits to the quality of patient care, thus blurring any judgement on cost-effectiveness that we might have. An overall value on cost-effectiveness though not in strict monetary terms can then be ascribed. In this review, we evaluate the role of these devices in the care of the pediatric patient and attempt to balance the advantages they offer against the cost they incur, both financial and environmental, and in any quality improvement they might offer in clinical care.

Laryngeal mask airway placement in children prior to an intravenous line utilizing heart rate as an indicator of anesthetic depth

INTRODUCTION

The usual practice in pediatric anesthesia cases requiring a laryngeal mask airway is to place an intravenous line (IV) prior to laryngeal mask airway placement. A different approach that has several clinical advantages is to place the laryngeal mask airway prior to the IV. We describe our experience with this technique, using heart rate as an indicator of adequate anesthetic depth. In addition, we analyzed heart rate data in children undergoing sevoflurane inductions, looking for age-related differences.

METHODS

Following a sevoflurane induction, heart rates were recorded every 12 s for 3 min in 127 ASA I-II children under age 7. Laryngeal mask airway placement occurred when the heart rate dropped at least 10% from its maximum level or at 3 min. Ease of laryngeal mask airway placement was graded using a scale from 0 to 3. Endtidal sevoflurane concentration, occurrence of laryngospasm and blood pressure at laryngeal mask airway placement were also recorded.

RESULTS

The laryngeal mask airway was successfully placed on the first attempt in all 127 children. Easy placement was noted in 98.4%. The youngest children's heart rates peaked earlier than the oldest (P < 0.001), while time to laryngeal mask airway placement increased with increasing age (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laryngeal mask airway placement before an IV is a safe alternative to the usual mask-IV-laryngeal mask airway sequence. Our data compare favorably to other studies where ease of laryngeal mask airway placement was reported. This technique has several advantages including securing the airway first for an anticipated difficult IV placement. Heart rate changes during a sevoflurane induction appear to be age-dependent.

Current UK practice of pediatric supraglottic airway devices - a survey of members of the Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland

OBJECTIVES

Over half of general anesthetics in the UK involve supraglottic airway devices (SADs). The National Audit Project 4 undertaken by the Royal College of Anaesthetists demonstrated that aspiration was the most frequent complication relating to SAD use. SADs designed to reduce this risk (second-generation devices) are increasingly recommended in both adults and children. As well as routine use, SADs are recommended for use in cases of 'difficult airway'. This survey assessed current usage of SADs in routine practice and difficult airways. Sixteen questions, approved by the Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (APAGBI) survey committee, were distributed to all its members.

RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-four members responded. Eighty-eight percent preferentially use first-generation rather than second-generation devices. The most important design feature was the availability of a complete range of sizes (84%). Seventy-seven percent felt that randomized controlled trials assessing SAD safety in children are needed. In cases of failed intubation, classically shaped SADs are preferred (79%). Three percent of responders intubate via an SAD routinely. Eighteen percent have employed this technique in an emergency. Thirty-six percent of responders have found an SAD to function poorly.

CONCLUSION

Pediatric anesthesiologists appear slow to embrace second-generation SADs. The role of SADs in the management of difficult airways is widely accepted. Research currently has little influence over the choice of which SAD to use, which is more likely determined by personal choice and departmental preference. There is a risk that some SADs are unsafe.

The self-pressurising air-Q® Intubating Laryngeal Airway for airway maintenance during anaesthesia in adults: a report of the first 100 uses

The self-pressurising air-Q® Intubating Laryngeal Airway is a new, commercially available, supraglottic airway device that incorporates a self-regulating periglottic cuff. In this retrospective review, we describe our initial clinical experience using the device in 100 patients. The ease and number of insertion attempts, airway seal pressure, device positioning, intubation success and oropharyngeal morbidity were recorded. The air-Q Intubating Laryngeal Airway was successfully inserted in all 100 patients and functioned adequately as a primary airway in 70 of the 72 patients in which it was used for this purpose. The median (interquartile range [range]) airway seal pressure was 22 (19-29, [10-40]) cmH2O. Intubation via the air-Q Intubating Laryngeal Airway was successful in 28 of 29 (97%) patients. Eleven percent of patients complained of sore throat postoperatively before discharge. In our series, the air-Q Intubating Laryngeal Airway performed adequately as a primary airway during anaesthesia with respect to ease of insertion, adequacy of airway maintenance and as a conduit for intubation in both anticipated and unanticipated difficult airways. Although our initial experience is positive, further investigation with larger numbers of observations are needed as the upper limits of the 95% confidence intervals for device failure (the worst failure rate the clinician could expect) are still high.