UNASSIGNED: The Air-Q Self Pressurized Airway Device with Blocker (SP Blocker) was compared to the Proseal Laryngeal Mask Airway (PLMA) during positive pressure ventilation regarding the primary outcome (oropharyngeal leak pressure [OLP]), secondary outcomes (peak inspiratory pressure [PIP], inspired tidal volume [ITV], expired tidal volume [ETV], leak volume [LV] and leak fraction [LF]), insertion time, ventilation score, fiber-optic glottis view score, and postoperative laryngopharyngeal parameters (LPM).
UNASSIGNED: Adult healthy female patients scheduled for elective gynecological laparotomies under general anesthesia using controlled mechanical ventilation were recruited to a prospective randomized comparative clinical trial. Exclusion criteria were body mass index (BMI) ≥ 35 kg m -2 , El-Ganzouri score ≥ 5, upper airway problems, hiatus hernia or pregnancy. Patients were classified into an SP Blocker group ( n = 75) and a PLMA group ( n = 75). Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed initially and at fixed time points after successful insertion of devices.
UNASSIGNED: Initially after successful device insertion: the SP Blocker group showed statistically significant higher mean OLP (cmH 2 O) (29.46 ± 2.11 vs. 28.06 ± 1.83 respectively; 95% CI: -2.037 to -0.76, P < 0.0001), lower mean PIP (cmH 2 O) (15.49 ± 0.61 vs. 17.78 ± 1.04 respectively; 95% CI: 2.02 to 2.56, P < 0.0001), higher mean ITV (mL) (411 ± 30 vs. 403 ± 15 respectively; 95% CI: -15.65 to -0.347, P = 0.041), higher mean ETV (mL) (389 ± 12 vs. 354 ± 11 respectively; 95% CI: -38.72 to -31.29, P < 0.0001), lower mean LV (mL) (22 ± 18 vs. 49 ± 10 respectively; 95% CI: 22.3 to 31.7, P < 0.0001) and lower mean LF (%) (5 ± 2.04 vs. 12 ± 6.8 respectively; 95% CI: 5.38 to 8.62, P < 0.0001) than the PLMA group. Mean insertion time (seconds) was shorter in the SP Blocker group than the PLMA group (16.39 ± 2.81 vs. 18.63 ± 3.44 respectively; 95% CI: 1.23 to 3.25, P < 0.0001). The SP Blocker group offered a better fiber-optic glottis view score than the PLMA group without differences concerning ventilation score and LPM.
UNASSIGNED: SP Blocker provided as safe anesthesia during controlled mechanical ventilation as PLMA.

UNASSIGNED: Intra-cuff pressure of Air-Q self-pressurized laryngeal airways (Air-Q SP) balances airway pressure and adapts to patient\'s pharyngeal and periglottic structures, thus improves oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP).This study was performed to compare efficacy of Air-Q SP with Proseal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) in patients undergoing elective surgery.
UNASSIGNED: The study design was prospective, randomized and controlled. Ninety patients were randomly assigned to Air-Q SP or PLMA group. All patients were premedicated and shifted to operation theatre. Monitoring was instituted. After securing IV-line, induction with inj. Morphine + Propofol, relaxation with inj. Vecuronium was done. Supraglottic was inserted according to group allocation. Outcome measures were OLP, fibreoptic view of larynx, success rate, device insertion parameters, haemodynamic and respiratory parameters and post-operative laryngopharyngeal complications. Neostigmine + glycopyrrolate were given, device was extubated.
UNASSIGNED: All supraglottic airway devices (SADs) were successfully placed in two attempts. The mean initial OLP, OLP at 10 minutes, and device insertion time were significantly lower in Air-Q SP group. Fiber-optic laryngeal view grading was significantly better with Air-Q SP. No significant difference was observed with respect to rate of successful insertion in first attempt, ease of insertion, and manipulations required. The hemodynamic/respiratory parameters and post-operative sore throat in the two both groups were similar.
UNASSIGNED: Proseal LMA has a higher OLP than Air-Q SP but average insertion time was better, and fiber-optic grading of laryngeal view was shorter with Air-Q SP. However, Air-Q SP and Proseal LMA were both effective for lung ventilation.

UNASSIGNED: The Baska mask (BM) and the Ambu AuraGain (AAG) have shown promising results in recent trials but have not been compared. Therefore, we aimed to compare the clinical performance of the BM and the AAG for airway management of adult patients.
UNASSIGNED: In this randomised comparative study, patients aged 18-60 years and with an expected surgical duration of less than 2 h were enroled. Patients were randomly allocated to AAG (Group A, n = 37) and BM (Group B, n = 37) for airway management. After induction of anaesthesia, an allocated supraglottic airway device (SAD) was inserted. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), time taken to insert SAD, number of insertion attempts, leak fraction (LF), first-attempt success rate, overall success rate, ease of insertion, fiberoptic view of the glottis, and complications were compared. The data were analysed using Student\'s t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Fisher\'s exact tests.
UNASSIGNED: Baseline and demographic characteristics were comparable. OLP (31.32 ± 2.59 versus 27.54 ± 1.32 cmH2O) was higher (P < 0.001), and LF (6.19% ± 1.20% versus 7.24% ± 1.72%) was lower (P = 0.003) in the BM group. First-attempt and overall success rate, time taken to insert, number of insertion attempts, ease of insertion, and fibreoptic view of glottis through the SADs were statistically similar between groups. However, the incidence of sore throat (P = 0.007) and cough (P = 0.028) was higher with AAG.
UNASSIGNED: Clinical performance of BM was better than AAG as the former had higher OLP, lower LF and complications.

UNASSIGNED: In the present study, we hypothesised that the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) Protector would provide higher oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) than LMA ProSeal. Thus, we planned this study to compare the clinical performance of LMA Protector and LMA ProSeal in terms of OLP as a primary objective and insertion characteristics as secondary objectives.
UNASSIGNED: Ninety patients of either gender, aged 18-70 years, were randomised into groups PS (LMA ProSeal) and P (LMA Protector). Following anaesthetic induction, the device was inserted as per group allocation. OLP of both devices was taken as a primary objective. Secondary objectives such as insertion time, ease of insertion, number of attempts required, fibre-optic view grading, amount of air (mL) required to get a cuff pressure (CP) of 60 cm H2O, and CP adjustment required and complications, if any, were also noted. Data were analysed using coGuide statistics software, Version 1 (BDSS Corp. Bangalore, Karnataka, India).
UNASSIGNED: The median (interquartile range) OLP was significantly higher with LMA protector than with LMA ProSeal [33.00 (27.0, 36.0) versus [29.50 (26.0, 32.0) (P = 0.009)]. First-attempt success rate was 95.4% (42/44) in group PS and 93% (40/43) in group P. Insertion time, ease of insertion, and fibre-optic view grading were not different between the groups. Gastric tube placement failed in one patient in group PS and in three patients in group P (P = 0.606). The median amount of air (mL) required to get a CP of 60 cm H2O was 26.5 (20, 28) in group PS and 12 (8,13) in group P (95% confidence interval [CI] =10.808-14.575) (P < 0.001). At all time points, CP was significantly higher, and more CP adjustments were needed in group PS than in group P (P < 0.001). Incidence of blood staining and post-operative sore throat at 1 and 24 h were not different between the groups.
UNASSIGNED: LMA Protector provided a significantly higher OLP and less requirement of CP adjustments but comparable first-attempt success rate, mean insertion time, fibre-optic view, and gastric tube insertion as compared to LMA ProSeal.

The effect of head rotation on supraglottic airway (SGA) oropharyngeal leak pressure (OPLP) has not been well elucidated. The aim of this study was to help clarify which SGA device provides higher OPLP at head-rotated position.
Patients who underwent elective surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled and randomly divided into laryngeal mask airway (LMA®) ProSeal™ and i-gel® groups. The allocated SGA device was inserted under anesthesia. The primary outcome was OPLP, and secondary outcomes were ventilation score, expiratory tidal volume, and maximum pressure under volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) with an inspiratory tidal volume of 10 mL·kg-1 ideal body weight and fibreoptic view of the vocal cords at 0°, 30°, and 60° head rotation.
Data from 78 and 76 patients were analyzed in the LMA ProSeal and i-gel groups, respectively. The mean (standard deviation) OPLP of the LMA ProSeal was significantly higher than that of the i-gel at the 60° head-rotated position (LMA ProSeal, 20.4 [6.5] vs i-gel, 16.9 [7.8] cm H2O; difference in means, 3.6; adjusted 95% confidence interval, 0.5 to 6.6; adjusted P = 0.02, adjusted for six comparisons). The maximum pressure under VCV at 60° head rotation was significantly higher in the LMA ProSeal group than in the i-gel group. The expiratory tidal volume of the LMA ProSeal did not significantly change with head rotation and was significantly higher than that of the i-gel at 60° head rotation. Ventilation score, fibreoptic view of the vocal cords, and complications were not significantly different between the ProSeal and i-gel groups.
The LMA ProSeal provides higher OPLP than the i-gel at a 60° head-rotated position under general anesthesia.
Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (https://jrct.niph.go.jp) (JRCT1012210043); registered 18 October 2021.
RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L’effet de la rotation de la tête sur la pression de fuite oropharyngée (OPLP en anglais) des dispositifs supraglottiques (DSG) n’est pas encore bien élucidé. L’objectif de cette étude était d’aider à déterminer quel DSG procurait une pression de fuite oropharyngée plus élevée lorsque la tête est en rotation. MéTHODE: Les patient·es qui ont bénéficié d’une intervention chirurgicale non urgente sous anesthésie générale ont été recruté·es et aléatoirement réparti·es en deux groupes, soit masque laryngé (LMA®) ProSeal™ ou i-gel®. Le DSG alloué a été inséré sous anesthésie. Le critère d’évaluation principal était la pression de fuite oropharyngée, et les critères d’évaluation secondaires étaient le score de ventilation, le volume courant expiratoire et la pression maximale sous ventilation à volume contrôlé (VVC) avec un volume courant inspiratoire de 10 mL·kg−1 du poids corporel idéal et une visualisation fibroscopique des cordes vocales à une rotation de la tête de 0°, 30° et 60°. RéSULTATS: Les données de 78 et 76 patient·es ont été analysées dans les groupes LMA ProSeal et i-gel, respectivement. La pression de fuite oropharyngée moyenne (écart type) du LMA ProSeal était significativement plus élevée que celle de l’i-gel en position de rotation de la tête à 60° (LMA ProSeal, 20,4 [6,5] vs i-gel, 16,9 [7,8] cm H2O; différence de moyennes, 3,6; intervalle de confiance ajusté à 95 %, de 0,5 à 6,6; P = 0,02 ajusté, ajusté pour six comparaisons). La pression maximale sous VVC à une rotation de la tête de 60° était significativement plus élevée dans le groupe LMA ProSeal que dans le groupe i-gel. Le volume courant expiratoire du LMA ProSeal n’a pas changé de manière significative avec la rotation de la tête et était significativement plus élevé que celui de l’i-gel à une rotation de la tête de 60°. Le score de ventilation, la visualisation fibroscopique des cordes vocales et les complications n’étaient pas significativement différents entre les groupes ProSeal et i-gel. CONCLUSION: Le LMA ProSeal procure une pression de fuite oropharyngée plus élevée que l’i-gel dans une position de rotation de la tête à 60° sous anesthésie générale. ENREGISTREMENT DE L’éTUDE: Registre japonais des essais cliniques (https://jrct.niph.go.jp) (JRCT1012210043); enregistré le 18 octobre 2021.

UNASSIGNED: The supraglottic airway device, i-gel, is used in obese patients for short- to medium-duration surgical procedures. Insertion techniques have contributed to the successful and proper placement of i-gel in the first attempt. This study aims to compare two techniques for successfully inserting i-gel in the first attempt in overweight and obese patients as measured by oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP).
UNASSIGNED: This interventional, randomised, controlled study was conducted after ethical approval, and trial registration in overweight and obese patients. Patients were randomised into two groups: In Group C, the conventional technique was used, while in Group R, the reverse technique was used to insert i-gel. OLP, successful placement, required manipulations, time taken for insertion, number of attempts, and intraoperative and postoperative complications were studied. The collected data were analysed statistically.
UNASSIGNED: The mean OLP (30.46 ± 3.76 vs. 32.12 ± 3.10 mmHg, P = 0.018) and the mean time of insertion (16.42 ± 1.86 vs. 13.98 ± 1.97 s, P = 0.001) for conventional and reverse techniques, respectively, were statistically significant and favourable for Group R compared to Group C. Successful placement of i-gel at the first attempt, ease of insertion, number of attempts and all the manipulations except withdrawal and advancement were comparable in both the groups. No postoperative complications were noted.
UNASSIGNED: The reverse technique significantly favoured the actual OLP values and the mean insertion time. Successful placement of i-gel at the first attempt was observed with both conventional and reverse techniques.

The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is commonly used for airway management. Cuff hyperinflation has been associated with complications, poor ventilation and increased risk of gastric insufflation. This study was designed to determine the best cuff inflation method of AuraOnce™ LMA during bronchoscopy and EBUS (Endobronquial Ultrasound Bronchoscopy) procedure. We designed a Randomized controlled, doble-blind, clinical trial to compare the efficacy and safety of three cuff inflation methods of AuraOnce™ LMA. 210 consenting patients scheduled for EBUS procedure under general anesthesia, using AuraOnce™ LMA were randomized into three groups depending on cuff insufflation: residual volume (RV), half of the maximum volume (MV), unchanged volume (NV). Parameters regarding intracuff pressure (IP), airway leak pressure (OLP), leakage volume (LV) were assessed, as well as postoperative complications (PC). 201 (95.7%) patients completed the study. Mean IP differed between groups (MV: 59.4 ± 32.4 cm H2O; RV: 75.1 ± 21.1 cm H2O; NV: 83.1 ± 25.5 cmH20; P < 0.01). The incidence of IP > 60 cmH2O was lower in the MV group compared to the other two (MV: 20/65(30.8%); RV:47/69 (68.1%); NV 48/67 (71.6%); p < 0.01). The insertion success rate was 89,6% (180/201) at first attempt, with no difference between groups (p = 0.38). No difference between groups was found either for OLP (p = 0.53), LV (p = 0.26) and PC (p = 0.16). When a cuff manometer is not available, a partial inflation of AuraOnce™ LMA cuff using MV method allows to control intracuff pressure, with no significant changes of OLP and LV compared to RV and NV insufflation method.Registration clinical trial: NCT04769791.

To investigate the effect of two-step of jaw-thrust technique on the placement of flexible laryngeal mask with both hands. 157 patients scheduled for functional endoscopic sinus surgery were divided into two groups using a random number table method: control group (group C, n = 78) and test group (group T, n = 79). After induction of general anesthesia, the traditional method was applied to insert the flexible laryngeal airway mask in group C, and the two-step of jaw-thrust technique with both hands by the nurse was applied to help place the laryngeal mask in group T. The success rate, alignment status, oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) of the laryngeal mask, soft tissue injury of the oropharyngeal cavity and postoperative sore throat, and the incidence of adverse airway event were recorded in both groups. Results: The success rate of the first placement of flexible laryngeal masks in group C and group T were 73.8% and 97.5%, and the final success rates were 97.5% and 98.7%, respectively. Compared with group C, the success rate of first placement in group T was higher, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the final success rate between the two groups (P = 0.56). The alignment score showed that the placement of group T was better than that of group C, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.01). The OLP of group C was 22.1 ± 2.6 cmH2O, and the OLP of group T was 25.4 ± 3.8 cmH2O. The OLP of group T was significantly higher than that of group C (P < 0.01). The incidence of mucosal injury and postoperative sore throat in group T were 2.5% and 5.0%, which were significantly lower than that of 23.0% and 16.7% in group C (both P < 0.01). There was no adverse airway event in each group. Conclusion: The two-step of jaw-thrust technique with both hands can improve the success rate of the first placement of the flexible laryngeal mask and the positioning of the laryngeal mask, increase the sealing pressure of the laryngeal mask, and reduce the incidence of oropharyngeal soft tissue injury and postoperative pharyngeal pain.

Ambu AuraGain has proven to be better compared with other supraglottic airway devices in terms of higher first-attempt insertion success rate, time and ease of insertion, high oropharyngeal leak pressure, and fewer complications in children. The performance of the BlockBuster laryngeal mask has not been evaluated in children.
The primary objective of this study was to compare the oropharyngeal leak pressure of the BlockBuster laryngeal mask with those of the Ambu AuraGain during controlled ventilation in children.
Fifty children aged 6 months to 12 years with normal airways were randomized into group A (Ambu AuraGain) and group B (BlockBuster laryngeal mask). After administration of general anesthesia, an appropriate size supraglottic airway (size 1.5/2.0/2.5) was inserted according to the groups. Oropharyngeal leak pressure, success and ease of supraglottic airway insertion, gastric tube insertion, and ventilatory parameters were noted. The glottic view was graded by fiberoptic bronchoscopy.
Demographic parameters were comparable. The mean oropharyngeal leak pressure in the BlockBuster group (24.72 ± 6.81 cm H2 O) was significantly higher than Ambu AuraGain group (17.20 ± 4.28 cm H2 O) by 7.52 cm H2 O (95% CI 4.27 to 10.76; p = 0.001). The mean time for supraglottic airway insertion in the BlockBuster and Ambu AuraGain group was 12.04 ± 2.55 s and 13.64 ± 2.76 s, respectively (mean difference- 1.6 s, 95% CI 0.09-3.12; p = 0.04). Ventilatory parameters, first-attempt supraglottic airway insertion success rate, and ease of gastric tube insertion were comparable between the groups. The BlockBuster group showed easy supraglottic airway insertion compared with the Ambu AuraGain group. The BlockBuster group had better glottic views with only the larynx seen in 23 out of 25 children compared to the Ambu AuraGain with only the larynx seen in 19 out of 25 children. No complication was noted in either group.
We found that the BlockBuster laryngeal mask has higher oropharyngeal leak pressure compared with Ambu AuraGain in a pediatric population.

To compare the potential influences of blind insertion and up-down optimized glottic exposure manoeuvre on the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OPLP) in using SaCoVLM™ video laryngeal mask (VLM) among patients undergoing general anesthesia. A randomized self-control study controlled was conducted to investigate the effect of two insertion techniques on OPLP. A total of 60 patients (male or female, 18-78 years, BMI 18.0-30.0 kg m-2 and ASA I-II) receiving selective surgery under general anesthesia were randomly recruited. After induction of anesthesia, the SaCoVLM™ was inserted by blind insertion manoeuvre. The glottic exposure grading(V1) of the SaCoVLM™ visual laryngeal mask and the OPLP(P1) were recorded. And the glottic exposure grading(V2) and OPLP(P2) of SaCoVLM™ were recorded again when the glottic exposure grading was optimal. The glottis exposure grading and OPLP were compared before and after different insertion manoeuver. The glottic exposure grading (V2) obtained by using up-down optimized glottic exposure manoeuvre was better than that obtained by using blind insertion manoeuvre (V1)(P < 0.001). The OPLP was significantly lower in the blind insertion manoeuvre (P1) than in the up-down optimized glottic exposure manoeuvre (P2) (32.4 ± 5.0 cmH2O vs. 36.3 ± 5.2 cmH2O, P < 0.001). In using SaCoVLM™, higher OPLP and better glottic exposure grading were achieved through up-down optimized glottic exposure manoeuvre, protecting the airway while real-time monitoring of conditions around the glottis, which significantly improves airway safety. Our results suggests that up-down optimized glottic exposure manoeuver may be a useful technique for SaCoVLM™ insertion.Trial registration: ChiCTR, ChiCTR2000028802. Registered 4 January 2020, http://www.chictr.org.cn/ChiCTR2000028802.