Ambu AuraGain vs LMA Supreme in Laparoscopic Surgery
Comparison of the Ambu AuraGain vs. LMA Supreme in Paralysed Patients Undergoing Gynecologic Laparoscopic Surgery in the Trendelemburg Position
The aim of the study is to compare the performance of two supraglottic airway devices (SGA), the new Ambu AuraGain and the LMA Supreme, in sixty female patients undergoing gynaecologic laparoscopy in the trendelemburg position.
Primary outcome is the airway seal pressure. Secondary outcomes are ease of insertion, quality of ventilation, endoscopic view of the glottis, gastric tube passage and complications.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
The patients are randomly assigned to 2 groups:
- Group 1: Ambu AuraGain.
- Group 2: LMA Supreme, Teleflex
Procedure:
The investigation protocol contains the following sections:
- Induction of anaesthesia. Intravenous infusion of remifentanil and propofol targeting the effect site (2-4 ng/ml and 4-6 µg/ml respectively). No muscle relaxant will be used for insertion of the SGA. Rocuronium 0.2 mg/Kg will be administered before initiation of pneumoperitoneum.
- Insertion of the SGAs. The size of the SGA device used is based on the manufacturers' recommendations. All devices are deflated a lubricated prior to use. Once inserted, the cuff is be inflated with a manometer up to 60 cm H20 Position of the device is adjusted if needed. Data recorded: size of SGA, time an number of attempts.
- Fibreoptic evaluation of the SGAs anatomical position: complete view of the vocal cords (I), epiglottis visible inside, but not causing obstruction (II), epiglottis visible and obstructing the glottic inlet (III), or glottic structures not identified (IV).
- Functionality of the gastric drainage channel of the SGAs: passage of a 16 G size tube.
- Measurement of airway seal pressure (oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP): at baseline, and at 15, 30 and 60 minutes. The maximum pressure allowed is 40 cm H2O.
Ventilatory mechanics and parameters are measured at baseline, and at 15, 30 and 60 minutes.
Perioperative complications: Hiccup, gastric distension, regurgitation / Aspiration, airway obstruction, laryngospasm, dental, mucosal or tongue injury, hypoxia (SpO2 < 92%)
- Removal of the SGAs: Presence of blood - 3 level grading (+/++/+++) Postoperative complications: sore throat, hoarseness, dysphonia, dysphagia, dysphagia: 3-point scale
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Barcelona, Spain, 08036
- Ambulatory Surgery, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients evaluated as eligible for a SGA
- ASA I-III
- Without criteria for difficult airway
- Body Mass Index ≤ 35 kg/m2
- The patient has signed the Informed Consent
- The patient understands his or hers rights and consequences related to this investigation
Exclusion Criteria:
- Planned operation time > 2 hours
- High risk of regurgitation
- Respiratory tract pathology
- Preoperative sore throat
- Patients with a known or predicted difficult airway
- Patients diagnosed with dementia or any mental handicaps
- Patient who has a guardian.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: Ambu AuraGain
Insertion of the supraglottic device and evaluation of its clinical performance
|
Evaluation of clinical performance in terms of Insertion, ventilation, position and complications
Gynecologic laparoscopic surgery in the trendelemburg position
|
|
Active Comparator: LMA Supreme
Insertion of the supraglottic device and evaluation of its clinical performance
|
Gynecologic laparoscopic surgery in the trendelemburg position
Evaluation of clinical performance in terms of Insertion, ventilation, position and complications
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Airway seal pressure
Time Frame: At 15 minutes
|
Maximum airway pressure that the device can achieve without oropharyngeal leak of gas.
|
At 15 minutes
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Ease of insertion of the device
Time Frame: Baseline
|
Time needed to insert the device
|
Baseline
|
|
Change in Quality of ventilation
Time Frame: At baseline and at 15, 30 and 60 minutes
|
number of manoeuvres/corrections required
|
At baseline and at 15, 30 and 60 minutes
|
|
Endoscopic view of glottic structures
Time Frame: At 15 minutes
|
Assessment of alignment with the glottic inlet as: complete view of the vocal cords (I), epiglottis visible inside, but not causing any obstruction (II), epiglottis visible and causing obstruction (III) or glottis not identified (IV)
|
At 15 minutes
|
|
Gastric tube insertion
Time Frame: At 5 minutes
|
Ease of passage of a gastric tube as: easy, difficult or impossible
|
At 5 minutes
|
|
Incidence of perioperative complications
Time Frame: 2 hours
|
number of patients with adverse events: Airway obstruction, desaturation, Aspiration, oropharyngeal trauma, sore throat
|
2 hours
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Ana M Lopez, MD, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimate)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimate)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- HBarcelona
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Airway Management
-
NCT07547943Not yet recruitingAirway Management | Difficult Airway
-
NCT07590739Not yet recruitingDifficult Airway | Obesity Difficult Airway Airway Management
-
NCT07077317CompletedAirway Management | Difficult Airway | Difficult Airway Intubation
-
NCT02644837TerminatedAirway Management | Laryngeal Mask Airway
-
NCT07340346CompletedAirway Management | Difficult Airway | Obstetric Anesthesia
-
NCT06596889Active, not recruitingAirway Management | Airway Complication of Anaesthesia
-
NCT03991325CompletedAirway Management | Upper Airway Sonographic Evaluation
-
NCT07355608Not yet recruiting
-
NCT05967507Recruiting
-
NCT05647174Not yet recruitingAirway Management
Clinical Trials on Ambu AuraGain evaluation
-
NCT03955094CompletedPediatric Endotracheal Intubation
-
NCT02816463Completed
-
NCT03108391Unknown
-
NCT03408431CompletedIntubation Complication | Intubation; Difficult or Failed
-
NCT05347680CompletedDifficult Intubation
-
NCT02878005UnknownIntubation; Difficult
-
NCT04045899CompletedProseal LMA vs Air-Q LMA vs Ambu AurGain LMA
-
NCT06853756RecruitingGastric Insufflation | General Anesthesia | Pediatric | Orthopedic Operations | I-gel | Ambu AuraGain