Comparison of Air-QⓇ insertion techniques in pediatric patients with fiber-optic bronchoscopic assessment: a prospective randomized control trial.
Air-QⓇ
Complications
Insertion techniques
Laryngeal mask airway
Laryngeal view
Supraglottic airway
Journal
Korean journal of anesthesiology
ISSN: 2005-7563
Titre abrégé: Korean J Anesthesiol
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 101502451
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2019
12 2019
Historique:
received:
24
12
2018
accepted:
28
05
2019
pubmed:
5
6
2019
medline:
15
8
2020
entrez:
5
6
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Air-QⓇ laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is a second-generation supraglottic airway device (SAD) providing adequate airway control despite the unfavorable airway anatomy in children. Several studies have assessed it as a conduit for tracheal intubation and compared its efficacy with that of other SADs, but there are no studies comparing the laryngeal view with midline and rotational insertion techniques of Air-Q. Therefore, this study compared the fiber-optic bronchoscopic (FOB) assessment of the Air-Q position using these two insertion techniques. This randomized controlled trial included 80 patients of the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I/II of either sex (age group 5-12 years, weight 10-30 kg), who were scheduled for elective surgery in the supine position under general anesthesia. The patients were randomly subjected to rotational and midline technique groups (n = 40, each), and appropriate sized Air-Q, based on the weight of the patient, was inserted using the technique allocated to each patient. Time taken and number of attempts for successful insertion of the devices and any complications after removal of device were studied. FOB grade 1 (ideal position) was seen in 29/40 (72.5%) and 19/40 (47.5%) children subjected to the rotational and classic midline techniques, respectively (P = 0.045). The time taken to successfully insert the Air-Q was significantly lesser in the rotational technique group (7.2 ± 1.5 s) than in the classic midline technique group (10.2 ± 2.1 s) (P < 0.001), whereas complications were similar in both groups. The rotational technique was associated with better FOB view, and was faster than the classic midline technique of Air-Q insertion in pediatric patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Air-QⓇ laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is a second-generation supraglottic airway device (SAD) providing adequate airway control despite the unfavorable airway anatomy in children. Several studies have assessed it as a conduit for tracheal intubation and compared its efficacy with that of other SADs, but there are no studies comparing the laryngeal view with midline and rotational insertion techniques of Air-Q. Therefore, this study compared the fiber-optic bronchoscopic (FOB) assessment of the Air-Q position using these two insertion techniques.
METHODS
This randomized controlled trial included 80 patients of the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I/II of either sex (age group 5-12 years, weight 10-30 kg), who were scheduled for elective surgery in the supine position under general anesthesia. The patients were randomly subjected to rotational and midline technique groups (n = 40, each), and appropriate sized Air-Q, based on the weight of the patient, was inserted using the technique allocated to each patient. Time taken and number of attempts for successful insertion of the devices and any complications after removal of device were studied.
RESULTS
FOB grade 1 (ideal position) was seen in 29/40 (72.5%) and 19/40 (47.5%) children subjected to the rotational and classic midline techniques, respectively (P = 0.045). The time taken to successfully insert the Air-Q was significantly lesser in the rotational technique group (7.2 ± 1.5 s) than in the classic midline technique group (10.2 ± 2.1 s) (P < 0.001), whereas complications were similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The rotational technique was associated with better FOB view, and was faster than the classic midline technique of Air-Q insertion in pediatric patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31159533
pii: kja.d.18.00367
doi: 10.4097/kja.d.18.00367
pmc: PMC6900414
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
570-575Références
Anaesthesia. 1991 Jun;46(6):489-91
pubmed: 2048673
Anaesthesia. 1996 Dec;51(12):1167-70
pubmed: 9038461
Paediatr Anaesth. 2012 Feb;22(2):156-60
pubmed: 21973052
Anaesthesia. 2011 Mar;66(3):185-90
pubmed: 21320087
Paediatr Anaesth. 2011 Apr;21(4):422-7
pubmed: 21175955
Paediatr Anaesth. 2015 Aug;25(8):795-800
pubmed: 25917434
Anesthesiology. 2011 Mar;114(3):495-511
pubmed: 21307770
Can J Anaesth. 2015 Jun;62(6):587-94
pubmed: 25537736
Can J Anaesth. 2013 Jun;60(6):557-63
pubmed: 23519724
Paediatr Anaesth. 2008 Apr;18(4):308-12
pubmed: 18315636
Paediatr Anaesth. 2009 Jun;19(6):618-22
pubmed: 19655442
Paediatr Anaesth. 2012 Dec;22(12):1197-204
pubmed: 22971118
Anaesthesia. 2008 Oct;63(10):1131-4
pubmed: 18647291
Indian J Anaesth. 2016 May;60(5):343-8
pubmed: 27212722
Anesth Analg. 2011 Jan;112(1):176-82
pubmed: 21081777
Paediatr Anaesth. 2012 Feb;22(2):161-7
pubmed: 21917058