RESUMO
The Ambu Aura-i laryngeal mask is considered to be a device for blind intubation as well as for fiberoptic guided intubation. The novel video laryngeal airway mask SaCoVLM is a supraglottic airway device that allows intubation under direct vision. We hypothesized that success rates for device placement and tracheal intubation with the SaCoVLM would be comparable with the Ambu Aura-i mask. A prospective, randomized clinical trial was conducted from March 2021 to December 2021. One hundred and twenty patients were enrolled and randomized in the study. Direct intubation was performed with the SaCoVLM, and fiberoptic guided intubation was performed with the Ambu Aura-i mask. The primary outcome measure was the first success rate of LMA placement. Secondary outcome measures were the time from device placement and time from endotracheal intubation (as well as the time for LMA removal after successful intubation), differences in airway leak pressure, fiberoptic grade of the laryngeal view, and incidence of blood staining. The first success rate of LMA placement was similar for the two devices. There was no difference in the time for successful endotracheal intubation between the Ambu Aura-i and SaCoVLM groups (24.1 s ± 6.3 versus 25.7 s ± 2.1; p > 0.05). The time for removal was slower in the SaCoVLM group than in the Ambu Aura-i group (20.8 s ± 0.8 versus 14.7 s ± 6.1; p < 0.01). The airway leak pressure was higher in the SaCoVLM group than in the Ambu Aura-i group (27.0 s ± 1.0 versus 22.3 s ± 3.6; p < 0.01), and the incidence of blood staining was higher in the SaCoVLM group (16.7%). The SaCoVLM has an overall comparable performance to the Ambu Aura-i mask. However, the SaCoVLM is better relative to direct intubation without the assistance of a flexible intubation scope, which reduces the device's demand.
Assuntos
Microtia Congênita , Epilepsia , Máscaras Laríngeas , Humanos , Criança , Estudos Prospectivos , Intubação IntratraquealRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The intubating laryngeal mask Fastrach™ is considered a gold standard for blind intubation as well as for fibreoptic guided intubation via a laryngeal mask. Recently, a single use version of the mask has been introduced. We compared the Fastrach single use with the new, low-priced single use intubating laryngeal mask Ambu Aura-i™. We hypothesised that the LMA Ambu Aura-i and the LMA Fastrach are comparable with respect to success rates for mask placement and blind tracheal intubation through the LMA device. METHODS: A prospective, randomised clinical trial. University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, from April 2011 to April 2012. Eighty patients undergoing general anaesthesia with planned tracheal intubation were randomised and enrolled in the study. Blind intubation was performed with either laryngeal mask using two different tracheal tubes (Rüsch Super Safety Silk™ and LMA ETT™). A crossover-design was performed after an unsuccessful procedure. Primary outcome measure was the overall success rate of blind intubation. Secondary outcome measures were the time to the first adequate ventilation, a subjective handling score, and a fibreoptic control of placement, as well as the success rate of mask placement, time for mask removal after successful intubation, differences in airway leak pressure, and the incidence of postoperative sore throat and hoarseness. RESULTS: The success rate of tracheal intubation with the Fastrach for the first and second attempt was significantly better compared with the Ambu Aura-i. Tracheal intubation was also significantly faster (14.1 s. ±4.4 versus 21.3 s. ±9.0; p < 0.01), and the time interval for mask removal after successful intubation was significantly shorter using the Fastrach device (24.0 s. ±8.2 versus 29.4 s. ±7.5; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between groups regarding the incidence of postoperative sore throat and hoarseness. CONCLUSION: Both laryngeal mask devices are suitable for ventilation and oxygenation. Blind intubation remains the domain of the LMA Fastrach, the Ambu Aura-i is not suitable for blind intubation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identification Number NCT03109678 , retrospectively registered on April 12, 2017.