Comparative evaluation of Ambu AuraGain™ with ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Kriti Singh, Pavan Gurha, Kriti Singh, Pavan Gurha

Abstract

Background and aims: Second generation supraglottic airways are increasingly being used in surgical patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Preventing aspiration at higher airway pressures may be at the expense of a higher cuff pressure which can impair mucosal perfusion. We attempted to elucidate whether Ambu AuraGain™ (AAU) would provide a higher oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) with a lower mucosal pressure in comparison to ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway (PLMA).

Methods: This was a prospective randomised study involving sixty patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia, using either AAU (Group AAU [n = 30]) or PLMA (Group PLMA [n = 30]) for elective ventilation. Primary outcome measure was the OLP. Number of insertion attempts, ease of insertion, time required for placement and calculated pharyngeal mucosal pressure were the secondary outcome measures. Data were analysed using Student's t-test and Chi-square test.

Results: No significant difference in the OLP was noted in both groups. The ease of insertion and success rate at first attempt was similar between the groups. Time taken for insertion in Group AAU was longer than Group PLMA (13.57 ± 1.94 vs. 11.60 ± 2.22 s). The calculated pharyngeal mucosal pressures were lower with Group AAU than Group PLMA for all 3 sizes. The minimum cuff pressure and minimum cuff volume required to prevent leak were found similar in both groups.

Conclusion: AAU provides adequate sealing pressures and effective ventilation with lower calculated pharyngeal mucosal pressure, compared to PLMA.

Keywords: Airway Management; Ambu AuraGain™; ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway; oropharyngeal leak pressure; supraglottic devices.

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT flowchart

References

    1. Pennant JH, White PF. The laryngeal mask airway. Its uses in anesthesiology. Anesthesiology. 1993;79:144–63.
    1. Kovac AL. Controlling the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. J Clin Anesth. 1996;8:63–79.
    1. Prys-Roberts C, Greene LT, Meloche R, Foëx P. Studies of anaesthesia in relation to hypertension. II. Haemodynamic consequences of induction and endotracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth. 1971;43:531–47.
    1. Maltby JR, Beriault MT, Watson NC, Liepert D, Fick GH. The LMA-ProSeal is an effective alternative to tracheal intubation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Can J Anaesth. 2002;49:857–62.
    1. AMBU. Baltorpbakken (DK): ABMU A/S. AuraGain™ Disposable Laryngeal Mask. [Last updated on 2015 Nov 13; Last cited on 2017 May 15]. Available from: .
    1. Dorsch JA, Dorsch SE. Understanding Anesthesia Equipment. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007. pp. 474–5.
    1. Asai T, Howell TK, Koga K, Morris S. Appropriate size and inflation of the laryngeal mask airway. Br J Anaesth. 1998;80:470–4.
    1. Singh I, Gupta M, Tandon M. Comparison of clinical performance of I-Gel with LMA-Proseal ™ in elective surgeries. Indian J Anaesth. 2009;53:302–5.
    1. Lopez AM, Agusti M, Gambus P, Pons M, Anglada T, Valero R. A randomized comparison of the Ambu AuraGain™ versus the LMA supreme in patients undergoing gynaecologic laparoscopic surgery. J Clin Monit Comput. 2016 Epub 2016 Nov 26.
    1. Jagannathan N, Hajduk J, Sohn L, Huang A, Sawardekar A, Gebhardt ER, et al. A randomised comparison of the Ambu® AuraGain™ and the LMA® supreme in infants and children. Anaesthesia. 2016;71:205–12.
    1. Lopez AM, Sala-Blanch X, Valero R, Prats A. Cross-over assessment of the AmbuAuraGain, LMA supreme new cuff and intersurgical I-Gel in fresh cadavers. Open J Anesthesiol. 2014;4:332–9.
    1. López AM, Valero R, Hurtado P, Gambús P, Pons M, Anglada T. Comparison of the LMA Supreme™ with the LMA Proseal™ for airway management in patients anaesthetized in prone position. Br J Anaesth. 2011;107:265–71.
    1. Gasteiger L, Brimacombe J, Perkhofer D, Kaufmann M, Keller C. Comparison of guided insertion of the LMA ProSeal ™ vs. the i-gel ™. Anaesthesia. 2010;65:913–6.
    1. Brimacombe J, Keller C, Pühringer F. Pharyngeal mucosal pressure and perfusion: A fiberoptic evaluation of the posterior pharynx in anesthetized adult patients with a modified cuffed oropharyngeal airway. Anesthesiology. 1999;91:1661–5.
    1. Marjot R. Pressure exerted by the laryngeal mask airway cuff upon the pharyngeal mucosa. Br J Anaesth. 1993;70:25–9.
    1. Brimacombe J, Berry A, Brain AI. Optimal intracuff pressures with the laryngeal mask. Br J Anaesth. 1996;77:295–6.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner