A Comparison of Supraglottic Airway Devices

December 7, 2015 updated by: Gulsah Karaoren, Umraniye Education and Research Hospital

A Comparison of Supraglottic Airway Devices; Lma Classic, Lma Fastrach and Lma Supreme; a Prospective, Randomized, Clinical Trial of Efficacy, Safety and Complications

This study aimed to compare the advantages and disadvantages of LMA Supreme, LMA Classic and LMA Fastrach regarding ease of insertion, repositioning, insertion time, effects on hemodynamic parameters, provision of adequate and safe airway, and oropharyngeal and systemic complications.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

As a result of studies regarding the provision of an airway which is less invasive than intubation but safer than mask to maintain patency of airway after anesthesia induction in brief surgical interventions, supraglottic airway devices have been introduced into practice. They are inserted to glottic entry via the oral route and can be used in emergent conditions where tracheal intubation and mask anesthesia are challenging.

Classic LMA was first introduced by Archie Brain, MD in 1988, and consists of a mask with a surrounding inflatable bag compatible to the shape of the hypopharynx and a tube that has a 30° angle with a mask.

Fastrach LMA ( LMA Fastrach: LMA North America. Inc. San Diego. CA) was first introduced in 1997 and has similar features to the LMA Classic, but it is designed to provide upper airway during intubation via blind intubation or fiberoptic assistance. It has a rigid handle that allows one-handed insertion, removal or adjustment.

Supreme LMA, first introduced in April, 2007, is a novel, sterile, single use, new generation supraglottic airway device which provides more rapid and higher volume gas passage through airway and can be inserted in a rapid and safe manner because of the advanced cuff and airway tube. The integrated gastric canal facilitates gastric aspiration.

Supraglottic airway devices seem to have advantages over each other in different aspects due to their distinct features. In literature, there are studies comparing various LMA types for different features. However, to best of our knowledge, there is no study comparing these 3 types of LMA regarding these parameter. This is the main point of difference of our study.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

90

Phase

  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Istanbul, Turkey
        • Istanbul Umraniye Education and Research Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 70 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • normotensive patients with mouth aperture > 3 cm,
  • thyromental distance > 6 cm,
  • sternomental distance > 12.5 cm,
  • body mass index < 35 kg m-2 were included in the study.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • patients with ASA III-IV,
  • those with a history of gastroesophageal reflux,
  • pregnancy,
  • cardiovascular and central nerve system disease,
  • those with difficulty in cooperation,
  • those undergoing intracranial, intraabdominal and Ear-nose-throat surgeries were excluded from study.

None of the methods changed after commencement of the study.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: group LMA supreme
Patients who received Laryngeal Mask Airway; LMA supreme
Supreme LMA is a novel, sterile, single use, new generation supraglottic airway device which provides more rapid and higher volume gas passage through airway and can be inserted in a rapid and safe manner.
Active Comparator: group LMA classic
Patients who received Laryngeal Mask Airway; LMA classic
Classic LMA consists of a mask with a surrounding inflatable bag compatible to the shape of the hypopharynx and a tube that has a 30° angle with a mask.
Active Comparator: group Fastrach
Patients who received Laryngeal Mask Airway; LMA fastrach
Fastrach LMA has similar features to the LMA Classic, but it is designed to provide upper airway during intubation via blind intubation or fiberoptic assistance. It has a rigid handle that allows one-handed insertion, removal or adjustment.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Ease of insertion will be rated using a 4-point scale (4: success at the first attempt without tactile resistance; 3: success at the first attempt with tactile resistance; 2: success at the second attempt; 1: failure at the second attempt).
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Composite measure of Hemodynamic parameters , change 20% from baseline in Mean Blood Pressure and Heart Rate
Time Frame: baseline and 1 month
baseline and 1 month
Number of Participants with oropharyngeal ( edema, haemorragie, blood in sputum) and systemic complications (anaflactic reactions)
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month
Time to successful insertion time and effective airway [ time to observation of 3 consequtive correct End-Tidal CO2 (EtCO2 )waves after insertion ] defined as insertion time and was recorded.
Time Frame: 1 monyh
1 monyh
Measure if the inserted device failed to provide adequate ventilation, the device position was changed within the oral cavity, which was then defined as repositioning
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Erdal Komur, MD, Istanbul Umraniye Education and Research Hospital

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

January 1, 2015

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 1, 2015

Study Completion (Actual)

June 1, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 3, 2015

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 14, 2015

First Posted (Estimate)

January 15, 2015

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

December 8, 2015

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 7, 2015

Last Verified

December 1, 2015

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

  • GK4

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.

Subscribe