A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Ambu AuraGain and i-gel in Young Pediatric Patients

Comparison of Ambu AuraGain and BlockBuster laryngeal mask for controlled ventilation in children undergoing minor surgical procedures under general anesthesia: A prospective randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Ambu AuraGain has proven to be better compared with other supraglottic airway devices in terms of higher first-attempt insertion success rate, time and ease of insertion, high oropharyngeal leak pressure, and fewer complications in children. The performance of the BlockBuster laryngeal mask has not been evaluated in children.

AIMS

The primary objective of this study was to compare the oropharyngeal leak pressure of the BlockBuster laryngeal mask with those of the Ambu AuraGain during controlled ventilation in children.

METHODS

Fifty children aged 6 months to 12 years with normal airways were randomized into group A (Ambu AuraGain) and group B (BlockBuster laryngeal mask). After administration of general anesthesia, an appropriate size supraglottic airway (size 1.5/2.0/2.5) was inserted according to the groups. Oropharyngeal leak pressure, success and ease of supraglottic airway insertion, gastric tube insertion, and ventilatory parameters were noted. The glottic view was graded by fiberoptic bronchoscopy.

RESULTS

Demographic parameters were comparable. The mean oropharyngeal leak pressure in the BlockBuster group (24.72 ± 6.81 cm H₂ O) was significantly higher than Ambu AuraGain group (17.20 ± 4.28 cm H₂ O) by 7.52 cm H₂ O (95% CI 4.27 to 10.76; p = 0.001). The mean time for supraglottic airway insertion in the BlockBuster and Ambu AuraGain group was 12.04 ± 2.55 s and 13.64 ± 2.76 s, respectively (mean difference- 1.6 s, 95% CI 0.09-3.12; p = 0.04). Ventilatory parameters, first-attempt supraglottic airway insertion success rate, and ease of gastric tube insertion were comparable between the groups. The BlockBuster group showed easy supraglottic airway insertion compared with the Ambu AuraGain group. The BlockBuster group had better glottic views with only the larynx seen in 23 out of 25 children compared to the Ambu AuraGain with only the larynx seen in 19 out of 25 children. No complication was noted in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the BlockBuster laryngeal mask has higher oropharyngeal leak pressure compared with Ambu AuraGain in a pediatric population.

Comparison of the oropharyngeal leak pressure between three second generation supraglottic airway devices during laparoscopic surgery in pediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown Proseal LMA and I gel similar to endotracheal intubation in ventilatory ability in pediatric laparoscopic surgeries.

AIMS

The primary aim of this study was to assess whether there is a significant difference in the oropharyngeal leak pressure between Ambu Auragrain, I-gel, and Proseal LMA during pediatric laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial, 90 male patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I aged between 6 months and 10 years who were scheduled for laparoscopic single-sided inguinal hernia repair were recruited and randomly allocated to three groups in which airway was secured with Ambu Auragain, I gel, or Proseal LMA. The primary outcome was oropharyngeal leak pressure. The secondary outcomes were peak pressures before and after pneumoperitoneum, fiberoptic view, insertion attempts, insertion time, manipulations, perioperative and postoperative anesthesia-related problems. Continuous variables were compared using the one-way analysis of variance or the Kruskal-Wallis test with post hoc Turkey analysis. Categorical and ordinal data were compared using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Oropharyngeal leak pressure before pneumoperitoneum was higher with I gel as compared to Ambu Auragain (27.36 ± 5.72 cm of H₂ O vs 23.56 ± 5.72 cm of H₂ O) (p = .021) and PLMA (27.36 ± 5.72 cm of H₂ O vs 23.24 ± 4.35 cm of H₂ O) (p = .011). Oropharyngeal leak pressure after pneumoperitoneum was also higher with I gel as compared to Ambu Auragain (31.58 ± 4.35 cm of H₂ O vs 26.83 ± 5.00 cm of H₂ O) (p = .001) and Proseal LMA (31.58 ± 4.35 cm of H₂ O vs 27.03 ± 3.80 cm of H₂ O) (p = .002). Oropharyngeal leak pressures of Ambu Auragain and Proseal LMA were comparable. Postoperative complications were similar in all the supraglottic airway devices. No regurgitation or aspiration-related problem was observed in our study.

CONCLUSION

I gel had a higher oropharyngeal leak pressure than the other two supraglottic airway devices and therefore may represent a better choice in situations where higher ventilatory pressures may be necessary, for example, in extremes of weight trendelenburg position, etc. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: Clinical trial registry of India (CTRI/2018/11/016445).

Comparison of the clinical performance of i-gel and Ambu laryngeal masks in anaesthetised paediatric patients: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Paediatric supraglottic airway devices (SGAs) are widely used in routine anaesthesia and serve as primary or back-up devices for difficult airway management. The inflatable Ambu laryngeal masks and non-inflatable i-gel are two improvements of SGAs based on classic laryngeal masks. The clinical performance and safety of these two devices in paediatric patients are still unclear and warrant further investigation.

AIM

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the clinical performance and safety of Ambu laryngeal masks and i-gel in anaesthetised paediatric patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception dates to April 2020. We identified published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which the intervention involved the use of Ambu laryngeal masks and i-gel in anaesthetised paediatric patients (age < 18 years). We assessed the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) as the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes were insertion time, success rate of insertion on the first attempt, and incidence of adverse events.

RESULTS

After searching for all relevant trials published up to April 2020, data from seven RCTs with a total of 667 paediatric patients (323 and 344 participants in the i-gel and Ambu groups, respectively) were evaluated. The mean OLP in anaesthetised paediatric patients was lower in the Ambu group [21.82 cmH₂O for Ambu vs 23.98 cmH₂O for i-gel, P = 0.003, 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.58 to -0.75, I² = 68%, Mantel-Haenszel random model]. We did not find any clear evidence of differences between the devices in terms of insertion time, success rate of insertion, and incidence of adverse events except for blood staining (risk ratio 5.86, 95%CI: 1.76 to 19.46, P = 0.004, I² = 0, fixed-effect model).

CONCLUSION

The i-gel airway may provide a better seal and is therefore probably more suitable than the Ambu laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetised paediatric patients. However, the evidence is insufficient to allow making firm conclusions or to guide clinical practice, owing to the small number of relevant published studies.

Supraglottic Airway Devices for Elective Pediatric Anesthesia: I-gel versus Air-Q, Which is the Best?

Objectives:

The objectives of the study were to compare the insertion facility, the effect on hemodynamic parameters, and effective ventilation using I-gel versus Air-Q supraglottic airway devices (SADs) for pediatric patients undergoing short-duration surgical procedures.

Patients and Methods:

One hundred and fifty children aged 3–10 years were randomly divided into two equal groups: Group I received I-gel and Group Q received Air-Q SAD. All patients were anesthetized by sevoflurane inhalation using a face mask without neuromuscular blockade. Study outcomes included SAD insertion success rate (SR), insertion time, anatomic alignment of the SAD to the larynx as judged using fiberoptic bronchoscope (FOB) inserted through the SAD, and tidal volume leak, and incidence of postoperative complications.

Results:

Total and first attempt SRs were 97.3% and 85.3% for I-gel and 94.7% and 82.7% respectively, for Air-Q with nonsignificant differences. However, I-gel insertion time (12.3 ± 3.6 s.) was significantly (P = 0.034) shorter than Air-Q (13.7 ± 4.2 s). FOB grading of laryngeal view through SAD was better with I-gel but without significant difference for patients who had view Grades 1-2. Percentage of tidal volume loss was significantly decreased at 5 min after insertion than immediately after insertion, in all patients, with a nonsignificant difference in favor of I-gel. Intraoperative hemodynamic changes and postoperative complications showed a nonsignificant difference between both the groups.

Conclusion:

Both Air-Q and I-gel SAD provided advantages for pediatric anesthesia during short-duration surgical procedure with nonsignificant differences. However, I-gel SAD required a shorter insertion time and provided a high SR which is satisfactory for trainees and during an emergency. I-gel SAD allowed minimization of tidal volume leak and gastric inflation and is associated with infrequent complications.

Difficult Airway Management in Neonates and Infants: Knowledge of Devices and a Device-Oriented Strategy

Difficult airway management (DAM) in neonates and infants requires anesthesiologists and critical care clinicians to respond rapidly with appropriate evaluation of specific situations. Therefore, organizing information regarding DAM devices and device-oriented guidance for neonate and infant DAM treatment will help practitioners select the safest and most effective strategy. Based on DAM device information and reported literature, there are three modern options for DAM in neonates and infants that can be selected according to the anatomical difficulty and device-oriented strategy: (1) video laryngoscope (VLS), (2) supraglottic airway device (SAD), and (3) flexible fiberoptic scope (FOS). Some VLSs are equipped with small blades for infants. Advanced SADs have small sizes for infants, and some effectively function as conduits for endotracheal intubation. The smallest FOS has an outer diameter of 2.2 mm and enables intubation with endotracheal tubes with an inner diameter of 3.0 mm. DAM in neonates and infants can be improved by effectively selecting the appropriate device combination and ensuring that available providers have the necessary skills.

Impact of visually guided versus blind techniques of insertion on the incidence of malposition of Ambu® AuraGain™ in paediatric patients undergoing day care surgeries: A prospective, randomised trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In adults, video laryngoscopy is recommended for supraglottic airway device (SGAD) placement as it results in better device position and higher oropharyngeal leak pressures. In children, there is a paucity of studies evaluating the impact of visually guided techniques on SGAD placement. Aim of the study was to evaluate the usefulness of visual-guided techniques of SGAD placement in children.

METHODS

Totally, 75 children, scheduled for elective surgery, were randomly allocated into three groups, that is, standard (S), direct laryngoscopy (DL), and video laryngoscopy (VL). Ambu AuraGain was placed blindly in group S, and under visual guidance with video laryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy in groups VL and DL, respectively. Ambu AuraGain position was determined by flexible videoendoscope. First attempt success rate, time for successful insertion, oropharyngeal leak and any complications were studied.

RESULTS

Incidence of malposition was not significantly different in group S (44%), DL (48%), and VL (64%); P = 0.32. The first attempt success rate was 100% in DL and 92% each in S and VL. Time to insert (seconds) was significantly higher in VL (37.9 ± 21.6), compared to S (18.4 ± 7.9) and DL (27.4 ± 14.5); P <0.001. Incidence of oropharyngeal leak, impact on ventilation, and complications were similar in all three groups.

CONCLUSION

In this study, there was no advantage of visually guided techniques for Ambu AuraGain placement in children.

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.