Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie 7/2018

26.03.2018 | Reports of Original Investigations

Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure between the Ambu® AuraGain™ and the LMA® Supreme™ supraglottic airways: a randomized-controlled trial

Erschienen in: Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie | Ausgabe 7/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Studies comparing the recently introduced Ambu® AuraGain™ (Auragain) with the LMA® Supreme™ (Supreme) supraglottic airway (SGA) have reported conflicting results regarding differences in oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP). This randomized-controlled trial investigated the OLP of the Auragain compared with the Supreme in patients undergoing ambulatory surgery.

Methods

Adult patients with a body mass index ≤ 40 kg·m−2 presenting for ambulatory surgery and requiring an SGA were randomized to receive either the Auragain or the Supreme. Anesthesia was induced with lidocaine (1 mg·kg−1), fentanyl (1-2 μg·kg−1), and propofol (2-3 mg·kg−1). The SGA was inserted using a standard technique with the cuff inflated to 60 cmH2O. The groups were compared for the primary outcome of OLP.

Results

One hundred sixty-five patients (n = 81, Auragain; n = 84, Supreme) completed the study. Demographics were similar between the groups. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) OLP was significantly higher in the Auragain than in the Supreme group [26.4 (2.8) cmH2O vs 21.6 (3.4) cmH2O, respectively; difference in means (MD), 4.8 cmH2O; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.9 to 5.8; P < 0.001]. The mean (SD) insertion time was longer in the Auragain than in the Supreme group [13 (4) sec vs 11 (3) sec, respectively; MD, 2 sec; 95% CI, 1 to 3 sec; P < 0.001].

Conclusion

In patients undergoing ambulatory anesthesia, the OLP was higher but took longer to insert with the Auragain than with the Supreme. A higher OLP may allow for SGAs to be utilized in a wider range of patients and procedures.

Trial registration

www.​clinicaltrials.​gov (NCT02816463). Registered 28 June 2016.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Campo SL, Denman WT. The laryngeal mask airway: its role in the difficult airway. Int Anesthesiol Clin 2000; 38: 29-45.CrossRefPubMed Campo SL, Denman WT. The laryngeal mask airway: its role in the difficult airway. Int Anesthesiol Clin 2000; 38: 29-45.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Zhang L, Seet E, Mehta V, et al. Oropharyngeal leak pressure with the laryngeal mask airway Supreme™ at different intracuff pressures: a randomized controlled trial. Can J Anesth 2011; 58: 624-9.CrossRefPubMed Zhang L, Seet E, Mehta V, et al. Oropharyngeal leak pressure with the laryngeal mask airway Supreme™ at different intracuff pressures: a randomized controlled trial. Can J Anesth 2011; 58: 624-9.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Keller C, Brimacombe JR, Keller K, Morris R. Comparison of four methods for assessing airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in adult patients. Br J Anaesth 1999; 82: 286-7.CrossRefPubMed Keller C, Brimacombe JR, Keller K, Morris R. Comparison of four methods for assessing airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in adult patients. Br J Anaesth 1999; 82: 286-7.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Moser B, Audigé L, Keller C, Brimacombe J, Gasteiger L, Bruppacher HR. Flexible bronchoscopic intubation through the AuraGain™ laryngeal mask versus a slit Guedel tube: a non-inferiority randomized-controlled trial. Can J Anesth 2017; 64: 1119-28.CrossRefPubMed Moser B, Audigé L, Keller C, Brimacombe J, Gasteiger L, Bruppacher HR. Flexible bronchoscopic intubation through the AuraGain™ laryngeal mask versus a slit Guedel tube: a non-inferiority randomized-controlled trial. Can J Anesth 2017; 64: 1119-28.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Kleine-Brueggeney M, Kotarlic M, Theiler L, Greif R. Limitations of pediatric supraglottic airway devices as conduits for intubation - an in vitro study. Can J Anesth 2018; 65: 14-22.CrossRefPubMed Kleine-Brueggeney M, Kotarlic M, Theiler L, Greif R. Limitations of pediatric supraglottic airway devices as conduits for intubation - an in vitro study. Can J Anesth 2018; 65: 14-22.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Shin HW, Yoo HN, Bae GE, et al. Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and clinical performance of LMA ProSeal™ and i-gel® in adults: meta-analysis and systematic review. J Int Med Res 2016; 44: 405-18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Shin HW, Yoo HN, Bae GE, et al. Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and clinical performance of LMA ProSeal™ and i-gel® in adults: meta-analysis and systematic review. J Int Med Res 2016; 44: 405-18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Eschertzhuber S, Brimacombe J, Hohlrieder M, Keller C. The laryngeal mask airway Supreme™ – a single use laryngeal mask airway with an oesophageal vent. A randomised, cross-over study with the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal™ in paralysed, anaesthetised patients. Anaesthesia 2009; 64: 79-83.CrossRefPubMed Eschertzhuber S, Brimacombe J, Hohlrieder M, Keller C. The laryngeal mask airway Supreme™ – a single use laryngeal mask airway with an oesophageal vent. A randomised, cross-over study with the laryngeal mask airway ProSeal™ in paralysed, anaesthetised patients. Anaesthesia 2009; 64: 79-83.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Wong DT, Yang JJ, Jagannathan N. Brief review: The LMA Supreme™ supraglottic airway. Can J Anesth 2012; 59: 483-93.CrossRefPubMed Wong DT, Yang JJ, Jagannathan N. Brief review: The LMA Supreme™ supraglottic airway. Can J Anesth 2012; 59: 483-93.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Jagannathan N, Hajduk J, Sohn L, et al. A randomised comparison of the Ambu® AuraGain™ and the LMA® supreme in infants and children. Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 205-12.CrossRefPubMed Jagannathan N, Hajduk J, Sohn L, et al. A randomised comparison of the Ambu® AuraGain™ and the LMA® supreme in infants and children. Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 205-12.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 2017; 31: 1255-62.CrossRefPubMed 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 2017; 31: 1255-62.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat 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.CrossRef 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.CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Shariffuddin II, Teoh WH, Tang EB, Hashim NH, Loh PS. Ambu® AuraGain™ versus LMA Supreme™ Second Seal™: a randomised controlled trial comparing oropharyngeal leak pressures and gastric drain functionality in spontaneously breathing patients. Anaesth Intensive Care 2017; 45: 244-50.PubMed Shariffuddin II, Teoh WH, Tang EB, Hashim NH, Loh PS. Ambu® AuraGain™ versus LMA Supreme™ Second Seal™: a randomised controlled trial comparing oropharyngeal leak pressures and gastric drain functionality in spontaneously breathing patients. Anaesth Intensive Care 2017; 45: 244-50.PubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Dobson G, Chong M, Chow L, et al. Guidelines to the practice of anesthesia - revised edition 2017. Can J Anesth 2017; 64: 65-91. Dobson G, Chong M, Chow L, et al. Guidelines to the practice of anesthesia - revised edition 2017. Can J Anesth 2017; 64: 65-91.
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Marshall SI, Chung F. Discharge criteria and complications after ambulatory surgery. Anesth Analg 1999; 88: 508-17.CrossRefPubMed Marshall SI, Chung F. Discharge criteria and complications after ambulatory surgery. Anesth Analg 1999; 88: 508-17.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Brimacombe J, Holyoake L, Keller C, et al. Pharyngolaryngeal, neck, and jaw discomfort after anesthesia with the face mask and laryngeal mask airway at high and low cuff volumes in males and females. Anesthesiology 2000; 93: 26-31.CrossRefPubMed Brimacombe J, Holyoake L, Keller C, et al. Pharyngolaryngeal, neck, and jaw discomfort after anesthesia with the face mask and laryngeal mask airway at high and low cuff volumes in males and females. Anesthesiology 2000; 93: 26-31.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Seet E, Rajeev S, Firoz T, et al. Safety and efficacy of laryngeal mask airway Supreme versus laryngeal mask airway ProSeal: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2010; 27: 602-7.CrossRefPubMed Seet E, Rajeev S, Firoz T, et al. Safety and efficacy of laryngeal mask airway Supreme versus laryngeal mask airway ProSeal: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2010; 27: 602-7.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Kang F, Li J, Chai X, Yu J, Zhang H. Tang Cl. Comparison of the I-gel laryngeal mask airway with the LMA-Supreme for airway management in patients undergoing elective lumbar vertebral surgery. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2014; 27: 37-41.CrossRef Kang F, Li J, Chai X, Yu J, Zhang H. Tang Cl. Comparison of the I-gel laryngeal mask airway with the LMA-Supreme for airway management in patients undergoing elective lumbar vertebral surgery. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2014; 27: 37-41.CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Joly N, Poulin LP, Tanoubi I, Drolet P, Donati F, St-Pierre P. Randomized prospective trial comparing two supraglottic airway devices: i-gel™ and LMA-Supreme™ in paralyzed patients. Can J Anesth 2014; 61: 794-800.CrossRefPubMed Joly N, Poulin LP, Tanoubi I, Drolet P, Donati F, St-Pierre P. Randomized prospective trial comparing two supraglottic airway devices: i-gel™ and LMA-Supreme™ in paralyzed patients. Can J Anesth 2014; 61: 794-800.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Tiefenthaler W, Eschertzhuber S, Brimacombe J, Fricke E, Keller C, Kaufmann M. A randomised, non-crossover study of the GuardianCPV™ Laryngeal Mask versus the LMA Supreme™ in paralysed, anaesthetised female patients. Anaesthesia 2013; 68: 600-4.CrossRefPubMed Tiefenthaler W, Eschertzhuber S, Brimacombe J, Fricke E, Keller C, Kaufmann M. A randomised, non-crossover study of the GuardianCPV™ Laryngeal Mask versus the LMA Supreme™ in paralysed, anaesthetised female patients. Anaesthesia 2013; 68: 600-4.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Beleña JM, Núñez M, Anta D, et al. Comparison of Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme and Laryngeal Mask Airway Proseal with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2013; 30: 119-23.CrossRefPubMed Beleña JM, Núñez M, Anta D, et al. Comparison of Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme and Laryngeal Mask Airway Proseal with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2013; 30: 119-23.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Russo SG, Cremer S, Galli T, et al. Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients. BMC Anesthesiol 2012; 12: 18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Russo SG, Cremer S, Galli T, et al. Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients. BMC Anesthesiol 2012; 12: 18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Van Zundert TC, Brimacombe JR. Similar oropharyngeal leak pressures during anaesthesia with i-gel™, LMA-ProSeal™ and LMA-Supreme™ laryngeal masks. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg 2012; 63: 35-41.PubMed Van Zundert TC, Brimacombe JR. Similar oropharyngeal leak pressures during anaesthesia with i-gel™, LMA-ProSeal™ and LMA-Supreme™ laryngeal masks. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg 2012; 63: 35-41.PubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Ragazzi R, Finessi L, Farinelli I, Alvisi R, Volta CA. LMA Supreme™ vs i-gel™–a comparison of insertion success in novices. Anaesthesia 2012; 67: 384-8.CrossRefPubMed Ragazzi R, Finessi L, Farinelli I, Alvisi R, Volta CA. LMA Supreme™ vs i-gel™–a comparison of insertion success in novices. Anaesthesia 2012; 67: 384-8.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat López AM, Valero R, Hurtado P, Gambus 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.CrossRefPubMed López AM, Valero R, Hurtado P, Gambus 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.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Ali MZ, Ebied RS, El-Tawdy AF, Refaat AI, Kamal NM. Controlled mechanical ventilation with LMA Sureme™ versus i-gel™ in anesthetized adult patients. J Egypt Soc Parasitol 2011; 41: 365-78.PubMed Ali MZ, Ebied RS, El-Tawdy AF, Refaat AI, Kamal NM. Controlled mechanical ventilation with LMA Sureme™ versus i-gel™ in anesthetized adult patients. J Egypt Soc Parasitol 2011; 41: 365-78.PubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Beleña JM, Gracia JL, Ayala JL, et al. The Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme for positive pressure ventilation during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Clin Anesth 2011; 23: 456-60.CrossRefPubMed Beleña JM, Gracia JL, Ayala JL, et al. The Laryngeal Mask Airway Supreme for positive pressure ventilation during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Clin Anesth 2011; 23: 456-60.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Teoh WH, Lee KM, Suhitharan T, Yahaza Z, Teo MM, Sia AT. Comparison of the LMA Supreme vs the i-gel™ in paralysed patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery with controlled ventilation. Anaesthesia 2010; 65: 1173-9.CrossRefPubMed Teoh WH, Lee KM, Suhitharan T, Yahaza Z, Teo MM, Sia AT. Comparison of the LMA Supreme vs the i-gel™ in paralysed patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery with controlled ventilation. Anaesthesia 2010; 65: 1173-9.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Tham HM, Tan SM, Woon KL, Zhao YD. A comparison of the Supreme™ laryngeal mask airway with the Proseal™ laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized paralyzed adult patients: a randomized crossover study. Can J Anesth 2010; 57: 672-8.CrossRefPubMed Tham HM, Tan SM, Woon KL, Zhao YD. A comparison of the Supreme™ laryngeal mask airway with the Proseal™ laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized paralyzed adult patients: a randomized crossover study. Can J Anesth 2010; 57: 672-8.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Chew EE, Hashim NH, Wang CY. Randomised comparison of the LMA Supreme™ with the I-Gel™ in spontaneously breathing anaesthetised adult patients. Anaesth Intensive Care 2010; 38: 1018-22.PubMed Chew EE, Hashim NH, Wang CY. Randomised comparison of the LMA Supreme™ with the I-Gel™ in spontaneously breathing anaesthetised adult patients. Anaesth Intensive Care 2010; 38: 1018-22.PubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee AK, Tey JB, Lim Y, Sia AT. Comparison of the single-use LMA Supreme with the reusable ProSeal LMA for anaesthesia in gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care 2009; 37: 815-9.PubMed Lee AK, Tey JB, Lim Y, Sia AT. Comparison of the single-use LMA Supreme with the reusable ProSeal LMA for anaesthesia in gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care 2009; 37: 815-9.PubMed
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Hosten T, Gurkan Y, Ozdamar D, Tekin M, Toker K, Solak M. A new supraglottic airway device: LMA-Supreme™, comparison with LMA-Proseal™. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009; 53: 852-7.CrossRefPubMed Hosten T, Gurkan Y, Ozdamar D, Tekin M, Toker K, Solak M. A new supraglottic airway device: LMA-Supreme™, comparison with LMA-Proseal™. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009; 53: 852-7.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Timmermann A, Cremer S, Eich C, et al. Prospective clinical and fiberoptic evaluation of the Supreme laryngeal mask airway™. Anesthesiology 2009; 110: 262-5.PubMed Timmermann A, Cremer S, Eich C, et al. Prospective clinical and fiberoptic evaluation of the Supreme laryngeal mask airway™. Anesthesiology 2009; 110: 262-5.PubMed
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Natalini G, Lanza G, Rosano A, Dell’Agnolo P, Bernardini A. Standard Laryngeal Mask Airway™ and LMA-ProSeal™ during laparoscopic surgery. J Clin Anesth 2003; 15: 428-32.CrossRefPubMed Natalini G, Lanza G, Rosano A, Dell’Agnolo P, Bernardini A. Standard Laryngeal Mask Airway™ and LMA-ProSeal™ during laparoscopic surgery. J Clin Anesth 2003; 15: 428-32.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Singh K, Gurha P. Comparative evaluation of Ambu AuraGain™ with ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Indian J Anaesth 2017; 61: 469-74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Singh K, Gurha P. Comparative evaluation of Ambu AuraGain™ with ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Indian J Anaesth 2017; 61: 469-74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Maitra S, Khanna P, Baidya DK. Comparison of laryngeal mask airway Supreme and laryngeal mask airway Pro-Seal for controlled ventilation during general anaesthesia in adult patients: systematic review with meta-analysis. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2014; 31: 266-73.CrossRefPubMed Maitra S, Khanna P, Baidya DK. Comparison of laryngeal mask airway Supreme and laryngeal mask airway Pro-Seal for controlled ventilation during general anaesthesia in adult patients: systematic review with meta-analysis. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2014; 31: 266-73.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Chen X, Jiao J, Cong X, Liu L, Wu X. A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™ during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One 2013; 8: e71910.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chen X, Jiao J, Cong X, Liu L, Wu X. A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™ during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One 2013; 8: e71910.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Sethi S, Maitra S, Saini V, Samara T. Comparison of Ambu® AuraGain™ laryngeal mask and air-Q™ intubating laryngeal airway for blind tracheal intubation in adults: a randomized controlled trial. Egypt J Anaesth 2017; 33: 137-40.CrossRef Sethi S, Maitra S, Saini V, Samara T. Comparison of Ambu® AuraGain™ laryngeal mask and air-Q™ intubating laryngeal airway for blind tracheal intubation in adults: a randomized controlled trial. Egypt J Anaesth 2017; 33: 137-40.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure between the Ambu® AuraGain™ and the LMA® Supreme™ supraglottic airways: a randomized-controlled trial
Publikationsdatum
26.03.2018
Erschienen in
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie / Ausgabe 7/2018
Print ISSN: 0832-610X
Elektronische ISSN: 1496-8975
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-018-1120-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2018

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie 7/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Update AINS

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.