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
Background: Supraglottic airway devices (SADs) are routinely used for securing the airway. In this study, the clinical performance of three SADs in adult patients under general anesthesia was compared.
Methods: American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-III subjects were randomly assigned to the i-gelTM (I), LMA SupremeTM (L), or Ambu AuraGainTM (A) group (30 per group). The primary objective of this study was to compare insertion times. Additionally, the ease of insertion, number of attempts, oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), airway maneuver requirement, difficulty with gastric tube placement, and complications were assessed.
Results: Demographic data did not differ between the groups. Group I (16.9 ± 4.9 s) had a significantly shorter time of insertion than Group L (19.6 ± 5.2 s) and Group A (22.1 ± 5.7 s) (P = 0.001). The OLP for Group A (29.8 ± 3.0 cmH2O) was higher than those for Group L (24.1 ± 6.3 cmH2O) and Group I (9.4 ± 6.1 cmH2O) (P < 0.001). The number of insertion attempts (P = 0.232), ease of insertion (P = 0.630), airway maneuver requirement (P = 0.585), difficulty with gastric tube placement (P = 0.364), and complications (P = 0.873) were not significantly different between the groups.
Conclusions: All three devices are convenient and effective for airway management in adults under general anesthesia. However, the shorter insertion time required for the i-gel may make it more suitable for resuscitation and emergencies, while aspiration risk may be reduced with the Ambu AuraGain, given its high OLP.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9346280 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kja.21212 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!