The design of the perfect pediatric supraglottic airway device

Comparison of clinical performance of Baska mask and Ambu AuraGain in patients undergoing surgery: A single-blinded, randomised comparative trial

Background and Aims

The Baska mask (BM) and the Ambu AuraGain (AAG) have shown promising results in recent trials but have not been compared. Therefore, we aimed to compare the clinical performance of the BM and the AAG for airway management of adult patients.

Methods

In this randomised comparative study, patients aged 18-60 years and with an expected surgical duration of less than 2 h were enroled. Patients were randomly allocated to AAG (Group A, n = 37) and BM (Group B, n = 37) for airway management. After induction of anaesthesia, an allocated supraglottic airway device (SAD) was inserted. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), time taken to insert SAD, number of insertion attempts, leak fraction (LF), first-attempt success rate, overall success rate, ease of insertion, fiberoptic view of the glottis, and complications were compared. The data were analysed using Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Fisher's exact tests.

Results

Baseline and demographic characteristics were comparable. OLP (31.32 ± 2.59 versus 27.54 ± 1.32 cmH2O) was higher (P < 0.001), and LF (6.19% ± 1.20% versus 7.24% ± 1.72%) was lower (P = 0.003) in the BM group. First-attempt and overall success rate, time taken to insert, number of insertion attempts, ease of insertion, and fibreoptic view of glottis through the SADs were statistically similar between groups. However, the incidence of sore throat (P = 0.007) and cough (P = 0.028) was higher with AAG.

Conclusion

Clinical performance of BM was better than AAG as the former had higher OLP, lower LF and complications.

Evaluation of the New SingularityTM Air versus Ambu® Aura GainTM: A Randomized, Crossover Mannequin Study

Background: This randomised crossover mannequin study aimed to compare the insertion time for the newly developed SingularityTM Air and the Ambu® AuraGainTM. The SingularityTM Air includes a bendable tube in order to allow optimal passform. Methods: Fifty anaesthetists with a minimum of 100 supraglottic airway device insertions were recruited and randomly assigned to start either with the SingularityTM Air or with the Ambu® AuraGainTM. Participants watched a tutorial video the day before the assessment and received a standardized introduction immediately before the assessment. The primary outcome was the time for successful insertion. Secondary parameters were the overall insertion success rate, the numbers of insertion attempts (maximum three), the glottic view through a flexible bronchoscope, and the success rate for gastric tube insertion. Results: Fifty participants were eventually recruited and randomly assigned to insert both devices according to the randomization. The insertion time was 24 s for SingularityTM Air as compared to 20 s for Ambu® AuraGainTM (p < 0.001). Overall insertion rate was 92% for the SingularityTM Air as compared to 100% for the Ambu® AuraGainTM (p could not be derived as one variable is a constant). The primary insertion success rate was better for the Ambu® AuraGainTM than for the SingularityTM Air (94% versus 68%; p: 0.002, respectively). Conclusion: The time for successful insertion and the insertion success rate for the newly developed SingularityTM Air is inferior to that for the Ambu® AuraGainTM.

Canadian Airway Focus Group updated consensus-based recommendations for management of the difficult airway: part 1. Difficult airway management encountered in an unconscious patient

PURPOSE

Since the last Canadian Airway Focus Group (CAFG) guidelines were published in 2013, the literature on airway management has expanded substantially. The CAFG therefore re-convened to examine this literature and update practice recommendations. This first of two articles addresses difficulty encountered with airway management in an unconscious patient.

SOURCE

Canadian Airway Focus Group members, including anesthesia, emergency medicine, and critical care physicians, were assigned topics to search. Searches were run in the Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL databases. Results were presented to the group and discussed during video conferences every two weeks from April 2018 to July 2020. These CAFG recommendations are based on the best available published evidence. Where high-quality evidence was lacking, statements are based on group consensus.

FINDINGS AND KEY RECOMMENDATIONS

Most studies comparing video laryngoscopy (VL) with direct laryngoscopy indicate a higher first attempt and overall success rate with VL, and lower complication rates. Thus, resources allowing, the CAFG now recommends use of VL with appropriately selected blade type to facilitate all tracheal intubations. If a first attempt at tracheal intubation or supraglottic airway (SGA) placement is unsuccessful, further attempts can be made as long as patient ventilation and oxygenation is maintained. Nevertheless, total attempts should be limited (to three or fewer) before declaring failure and pausing to consider "exit strategy" options. For failed intubation, exit strategy options in the still-oxygenated patient include awakening (if feasible), temporizing with an SGA, a single further attempt at tracheal intubation using a different technique, or front-of-neck airway access (FONA). Failure of tracheal intubation, face-mask ventilation, and SGA ventilation together with current or imminent hypoxemia defines a "cannot ventilate, cannot oxygenate" emergency. Neuromuscular blockade should be confirmed or established, and a single final attempt at face-mask ventilation, SGA placement, or tracheal intubation with hyper-angulated blade VL can be made, if it had not already been attempted. If ventilation remains impossible, emergency FONA should occur without delay using a scalpel-bougie-tube technique (in the adult patient). The CAFG recommends all institutions designate an individual as "airway lead" to help institute difficult airway protocols, ensure adequate training and equipment, and help with airway-related quality reviews.