Next Article in Journal
Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment. A Back to the Drawing Board Project or High Expectations for Low Unmet Needs?
Previous Article in Journal
APOE Promoter Polymorphism-219T/G is an Effect Modifier of the Influence of APOE ε4 on Alzheimer’s Disease Risk in a Multiracial Sample
Open AccessArticle

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Ambu AuraGain and i-gel in Young Pediatric Patients

1
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul 05505, Korea
2
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Sun Medical Center, Daejeon 34811, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8(8), 1235; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8081235
Received: 10 July 2019 / Revised: 9 August 2019 / Accepted: 13 August 2019 / Published: 16 August 2019
(This article belongs to the Section Anesthesiology)
Supraglottic airway devices have been increasingly used because of their several advantages. Previous studies showed that the small-sized i-gel provides effective ventilation for young pediatric patients; however, few studies have reported the use of AuraGain in these patients. Herein, we compared the clinical performance of AuraGain and i-gel in young pediatric patients aged between 6 months and 6 years old and weighing 5–20 kg, who were scheduled to undergo extremity surgery under general anesthesia. In total, 68 patients were enrolled and randomly allocated into two groups: AuraGain group and i-gel group. The primary outcome was the requirement of additional airway maneuvers. We also analyzed insertion parameters, fiberoptic bronchoscopic view, oropharyngeal leak pressure, and peri-operative adverse effects. Compared with the AuraGain group, the i-gel group required more additional airway maneuvers during the placement of the device and maintenance of ventilation. The fiberoptic view was better in the AuraGain group than in the i-gel group. However, the oropharyngeal leak pressure was higher in the i-gel group. AuraGain might be a better choice over i-gel considering the requirement of additional airway maneuvers. However, when a higher oropharyngeal leak pressure is required, the i-gel is more beneficial than AuraGain. View Full-Text
Keywords: Ambu AuraGain; i-gel; pediatric patients; supraglottic airway device Ambu AuraGain; i-gel; pediatric patients; supraglottic airway device
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Kim, H.-J.; Park, H.-S.; Kim, S.-Y.; Ro, Y.-J.; Yang, H.-S.; Koh, W.U. A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Ambu AuraGain and i-gel in Young Pediatric Patients. J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8, 1235.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop