The AMBU® Aura-i™ Laryngeal Mask and LMA Supreme™: A Randomized Trial of Clinical Performance and Fibreoptic Positioning in Unparalysed, Anaesthetised Patients by Novices

Zanahriah Yahaya, Wendy H Teoh, Nora A Dintan, Ravi Agrawal, Zanahriah Yahaya, Wendy H Teoh, Nora A Dintan, Ravi Agrawal

Abstract

Introduction. Manikin studies' data cannot accurately be extrapolated to real-life scenarios and inherent differences in design and materials of newer products may affect their clinical performance. Methods. Hence, we compared the AMBU® Aura-i™ and LMA Supreme™ in this randomized trial involving 100 ASA 1-2 unparalysed anaesthetised patients undergoing minor gynaecological surgery. Investigators had <20 Aura-i insertions. Primary outcome was time to achieve effective ventilation and secondarily insertion parameters, oropharyngeal leak pressures (OLP), fibreoptic positioning, and pharyngeal morbidity. The position of the Ambu Aura-i was evaluated with the Ascope; the fiberoptic view of the glottis was scored on a five-point scale. Results. 43 (86%) AMBU Aura-i and 44 (88%) LMA Supremes were successfully inserted on first attempt (p = 0.59), with similar ease (p = 0.79), and comparable times to first capnogram, mean (SD) 18.2 (6.0) versus 17.3 (6.4) sec, p = 0.9. The Aura-i needed significantly less volume of air to inflate its cuff to 60 cmH2O on the manometer, 17.7 (3.5) versus 23.1 (4.4) mL, p < 0.001. Both devices exhibited similar OLP, Aura-i versus LMA Supreme, mean (SD) 28.8 (7.1) versus 27.3 (5.3) cmH2O, p = 0.24. There was no difference in ease of insertion or adjustment manoeuvres to aid ventilation. 90% of patients had good positioning of Aura-i on fibreoptic check, yielding a view of the vocal cords and epiglottis. In 5 patients (10%), the vocal cords were not seen, but ventilatory function was unaffected. Conclusions. The Aura-i handled well in novices hands, with comparable times to insert and establish ventilation, similar leak pressures, and successful first attempt insertion rates compared to the LMA Supreme.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow of patients through the study.

References

    1. Greenland K. B., Tan H., Edwards M. Intubation via a laryngeal mask airway with an Aintree catheter—not all laryngeal masks are the same. Anaesthesia. 2007;62(9):966–967. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2007.05235.x.
    1. Keller C., Brimacombe J., Puhringer F. A fibreoptic scoring system to assess the position of laryngeal mask airway devices. Interobserver variability and a comparison between the standard, flexible and intubating laryngeal mask airways. Anasthesiologie Intensivmedizin Notfallmedizin Schmerztherapie. 2000;35(11):692–694. doi: 10.1055/s-2000-8164.
    1. Hagberg C. A., Jensen F. S., Genzwuerker H. V., et al. A multicenter study of the Ambu laryngeal mask in nonparalyzed, anesthetized patients. Anesthesia and Analgesia. 2005;101(6):1862–1866. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000184181.92140.7c.
    1. Ng S. Y., Teoh W. H. L., Lim Y., Cheong V. G. Comparison of the AMBU® laryngeal mask and the LMA classic in anaesthetised, spontaneously breathing patients. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care. 2007;35(1):57–61.
    1. Sudhir G., Redfern D., Hall J. E., Wilkes A. R., Cann C. A comparison of the disposable Ambu® AuraOnce™ Laryngeal Mask with the reusable LMA Classic™ laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia. 2007;62(7):719–722. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2007.05067.x.
    1. Joshi S., Sciacca R. R., Solanki D. R., Young W. L., Mathru M. M. A prospective evaluation of clinical tests for placement of laryngeal mask airways. Anesthesiology. 1998;89(5):1141–1146. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199811000-00014.
    1. Teoh W. H. L., Lee K. M., Suhitharan T., Yahaya Z., Teo M. M., Sia A. T. H. Comparison of the LMA Supreme vs the i-gel™ in paralysed patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery with controlled ventilation. Anaesthesia. 2010;65(12):1173–1179. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2010.06534.x.
    1. Lee A. K. Y., Tey J. B. L., Lim Y., Sia A. T. H. Comparison of the single-use LMA Supreme with the reusable ProSeal LMA for anaesthesia in gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care. 2009;37(5):815–819.
    1. McAleavey F., Michalek P. Aura-i™ laryngeal mask as a conduit for elective fibreoptic intubation. Anaesthesia. 2010;65(11):p. 1151. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2010.06528.x.
    1. Jagannathan N., Sohn L. E., Sawardekar A., et al. A randomized trial comparing the Ambu® Aura-i™ with the air-Q™ intubating laryngeal airway as conduits for tracheal intubation in children. Paediatric Anaesthesia. 2012;22(12):1197–1204. doi: 10.1111/pan.12024.
    1. Tominaga A., Ueshima H., Ariyama J., Kitamura A. Successful intubation in a difficult case using an Ambu Laryngeal Mask Angle Type-i, and the ability to pass a gastric tube behind the laryngeal mask. Masui. 2014;63(5):545–547.
    1. Komasawa N., Ueki R., Kaminoh Y., Nishi S.-I. Evaluation of chest compression effect on airway management with air-Q®, aura-i®, i-gel®, and Fastrack® intubating supraglottic devices by novice physicians: a randomized crossover simulation study. Journal of Anesthesia. 2014;28(5):676–680. doi: 10.1007/s00540-014-1802-1.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe