Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Purpose: The i-gel is a supraglottic airway device with non-inflatable cuff which can suffer insertion failure if its standard placement technique is implemented. The aim of this study was to compare the placement technique proposed by the manufacturer of i-gel with the triple airway maneuver in terms of successful device insertion time and first-attempt success.
Methods: After ethics committee approval, 103 ASA I-III patients were randomly allocated to the standard or triple airway maneuver groups. In the standard Group, the i-gel was inserted in the sniffing position while, in the triple group, it was inserted using the triple airway maneuver consisting of head tilt, jaw thrust, and open mouth. The time taken for successful insertion, first-attempt success rate, i-gel position, airway complications, and hemodynamic responses were assessed.
Results: Between the two groups patient characteristics were similar. Time for successful insertion was significantly shorter in the triple group (20 ± 7 s) than with the standard technique (32 ± 11 s; p < 0.001). Successful insertion at the first attempt was 78% and 92% for the standard and triple group, respectively (p = 0.092). The i-gel position, airway complications, and hemodynamic responses were similar in both groups.
Conclusion: The triple airway maneuver required less i-gel insertion time as compared with the standard placement technique. First-attempt success rates were similar with both techniques, although the triple airway maneuver was superior to the standard method as a rescue technique in failed insertions. We therefore recommend use of the triple airway maneuver in i-gel insertion.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00540-020-02780-0 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!