A randomized controlled trial comparing three supraglottic airway devices used as a conduit to facilitate tracheal intubation with flexible bronchoscopy
Authors' conclusion
All three second-generation SGA devices performed similarly regarding intubation.
Study context
- Population
- ASA I–III patients undergoing GA; excluded contraindications to supraglottic airway (SGA) or drugs, pregnancy, neck, spine or respiratory anomalyenrolled
- Participants
- One hundred and fifty patients
- Comparison
- AuraGain vs Air-Q Blocker vs i-gel
- Primary endpoint
- Intubation time, from SGA circuit disconnection to CO2 measurement
Methodological detailsprospective, single-blinded, three-arm, Enrolment March 2017 to January 2018
- Prospective
- Single-blinded
- Three-arm
- Enrolment March 2017 to January 2018
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Median intubation time
P = 0.08
Secondary outcomes
SGA insertion time · i-gel faster to insert; across the three groups
P < 0.001
| Outcome | P value |
|---|---|
| Ease of SGA insertionAir-Q Blocker vs i-gel · i-gel easier to insert | P = 0.001 |
| Ease of SGA insertionAuraGain vs i-gel · i-gel easier to insert | P = 0.002 |
| Ease of SGA removalAir-Q Blocker vs i-gel · Air-Q Blocker easier to remove | P < 0.001 |
Success of SGA insertion, success of intubation, number of attempts
- Similar across the three groups
Original publication
A randomized controlled trial comparing three supraglottic airway devices used as a conduit to facilitate tracheal intubation with flexible bronchoscopy. Can J Anaesth. Published 13 April 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →