Comparison of ultrasonographic measurement of gastric antral volume and pH with or without pharmacological acid aspiration prophylaxis in low-risk surgical patients - A randomized clinical trial.

Background and Aims: The role of preoperative pharmacological prophylaxis in preventing aspiration pneumonitis under general anesthesia (GA) in patients at low risk of aspiration pneumonitis is still under debate. We addressed the need for routine pharmacological aspiration prophylaxis in at-risk population by assessing the change in gastric volume using ultrasound with and without pharmacological acid aspiration prophylaxis. Material and Methods: A single-center, randomized double-blinded trial, with 200 adult patients scheduled for elective surgical procedures under GA, were randomized into a prophylaxis group, in which the patients received oral famotidine and metoclopramide, and a no prophylaxis group, in which the patients did not receive any prophylaxis. Gastric volume derived from preinduction measurement of gastric antral volume by ultrasound, postinduction gastric pH, and incidences of aspiration pneumonitis were compared. Bland-Altman plot was used to determine the level of agreement between measured gastric volume and ultrasonography based on calculated gastric volume. Results: The gastric antral cross-sectional area (CSA) and volume in the no prophylaxis group (3.12 cm2 and 20.11 ml, respectively) were comparable to the prophylaxis group (2.56 cm2 and 19.67 ml, respectively) (P-values 0.97 and 0.63, respectively). Although there was a statistically significant decrease in gastric pH in the no prophylaxis group (P-value 0.01), it was not clinically significant to increase the risk of aspiration pneumonitis based on Roberts and Shirley criteria (P-value 0.39). Conclusion: In an adequately fasted low-risk population, the amount of residual gastric volume was similar and below the aspiration threshold, regardless of the aspiration prophylaxis status.

Comparison of airway collapsibility following single induction dose ketamine with propofol versus propofol sedation in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging: A randomised controlled study.

Background and Aims: Adequate sedation is essential for children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) console. Propofol is commonly used for sedation, but it has the drawback of upper airway collapse at higher doses, which may be overcome by ketamine. This study was designed to evaluate the beneficial effect of ketamine on propofol in preventing airway collapse. Methods: Fifty-eight children undergoing MRI were randomised to Group P (propofol bolus dose followed by infusion or Group KP (bolus dose of ketamine and propofol followed by propofol infusion). The primary aim is to compare the upper airway cross-sectional area (CSA) and diameters (transverse diameter [TD] and anteroposterior diameter [APD]) obtained from MRI during inspiration and expiration. Results: Upper airway collapse as measured by delta CSA in mean (SD) [95% confidence interval] was statistically more significant between the two groups [at the soft palate level, 16.9 mm2 (19.8) [9.3-24.4] versus 9.0 mm2 (5.50) [6.9-11.1] (P = 0.043); at the base of the tongue level, 15.4 mm2 (11.03) [11.2-19.6] versus 7.48 mm2 (4.83) [5.64-9.32] (P < 0.001); at the epiglottis level, 23.9 (26.05) [14.0-33.8] versus 10.9 mm2 (9.47) [7.35-14.5] (P = 0.014)]. A significant difference was obtained for TD at all levels and for APD at the soft palate and base of tongue level. Conclusion: Adding a single dose of ketamine to propofol reduced the upper airway collapse significantly, as evidenced by the MRI-based measurements of upper airway dimensions, compared to propofol alone.

Comparison of Gastric Insufflation Volume Between Ambu AuraGain and ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway Using Ultrasonography in Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Ambu AuraGain and ProSeal laryngeal mask airway are second-generation supraglottic airway devices (SADs) with added advantage of gastric drain and better oropharyngeal sealing pressure. The primary objective was to study the difference in the gastric insufflation volume between Ambu AuraGain and ProSeal LMA in patients undergoing general anesthesia. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial involving 120 adult patients scheduled under general anesthesia were randomized into either Ambu AuraGain or LMA ProSeal group. Gastric cross-sectional area was measured using ultrasonography at baseline, after mask ventilation, and at the end of surgery. Gastric volume was calculated from the measured cross-sectional area. Oropharyngeal sealing pressure, peak airway pressure, and postoperative complications were noted. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 22 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.) and p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Demographic profile of the study groups was comparable. There was a significant difference in gastric volume between the groups at the end of surgery with 5.91 ml (±9.68 ml) in Ambu AuraGain group and 12.28 ml (±13.05 ml) in the LMA ProSeal group (p = 0.001). Similarly, there was a difference in volume between baseline and at the end of the surgery within the groups also (Ambu AuraGain group, p=0.0012; LMA ProSeal group, p=0.0015, respectively). Though the oropharyngeal sealing pressure and peak airway pressures were comparable, increased incidence of postoperative complications was observed with LMA ProSeal. CONCLUSION: Thus, Ambu AuraGain resulted in a lower gastric insufflation volume than LMA ProSeal with lesser incidence of postoperative complications.