To Compare the Ease of Intubation Through an I-gel Versus AMBU AuraGain: A Prospective Randomised Study

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorBindra, Tripat Kauren_US
dc.contributor.authorGrewal, Tejinderpal Kauren_US
dc.contributor.authorSoni, Sumiten_US
dc.contributor.authorDuvedi, Shuchien_US
dc.contributor.authorGurlivleenen_US
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-24T08:08:41Z
dc.date.available2024-09-24T08:08:41Z
dc.date.issued2024-04
dc.description.abstractBackground: Supraglottic Airway Devices (SAD) have become a fundamental part of difficult airway algorithms and are attaining popularity as airway management device during general anaesthesia. These devices can also be used as conduit for endotracheal intubation. The study aimed to evaluate the success and ease of I-gel and Ambu AuraGain (AAG) as conduit for endotracheal intubation. Methods: 100 patients (20-60 years) were registered in this prospective, randomized study. After induction, appropriate size Ambu AuraGain/ I-gel were inserted. After confirmation of proper placement of SAD, endotracheal tube was inserted. The number of successful blind intubations, time taken for intubation through either of the SADs, number of attempts taken for effective SAD placement, time to achieve effective ventilation after SAD placement, number of attempts taken for blind endotracheal intubation, number of cases in which fiberoptic scope is used, hemodynamics and complications were recorded. Data was analyzed using chi square test and Fisher Exact Test. Results: The overall success rate for SAD placement was 100% in both the groups however insertion time was significantly shorter with I-gel(17.58±1.31seconds) compared to Ambu AuraGain (21.34±1.65seconds) (p<0.001). Success rate for blind intubation through SAD was significantly higher in I-gel group (40% in AAG and 74% in I-gel, p=0.002). The use of fiberoptic scope for intubation was similar in both the groups (60% in AAG and 76.9% in I-gel, p=0.284). Overall intubation success for I-gel was 94% and AAG was 76% (p=0.011) and time taken for successful intubation through I-gel was significantly less as compared to Ambu AuraGain (p<0.001). Conclusion: I-gel is a better conduit for endotracheal intubation than Ambu AuraGain with higher success rate and less time required for endotracheal intubation.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationsDepartment of Anesthesia, Government Medical College, Patiala, Punjab, India.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationsDepartment of Anesthesia, Government Medical College, Patiala, Punjab, India.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationsDepartment of Anesthesia, Government Medical College, Patiala, Punjab, India.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationsDepartment of Anesthesia, Government Medical College, Patiala, Punjab, India.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationsDepartment of Anesthesia, Government Medical College, Patiala, Punjab, India.en_US
dc.identifier.citationBindra Tripat Kaur, Grewal Tejinderpal Kaur, Soni Sumit, Duvedi Shuchi, Gurlivleen . To Compare the Ease of Intubation Through an I-gel Versus AMBU AuraGain: A Prospective Randomised Study. International Journal of Medical Research Professionals. 2024 Mar; 10(2): 11-16en_US
dc.identifier.issn2454-6356
dc.identifier.issn2454-6364
dc.identifier.placeIndiaen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://imsear.searo.who.int/handle/123456789/231026
dc.languageenen_US
dc.publisherIbn Sina Academy of Medieval Medicine & Sciencesen_US
dc.relation.issuenumber2en_US
dc.relation.volume10en_US
dc.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.21276/ijmrp.2024.10.2.003en_US
dc.subjectSupraglottic Airway Devices (SAD)en_US
dc.subjectAmbu AuraGain (AAG)en_US
dc.subjectI-gelen_US
dc.titleTo Compare the Ease of Intubation Through an I-gel Versus AMBU AuraGain: A Prospective Randomised Studyen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
ijmrp2024v10n2p11.pdf
Size:
242.76 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Collections
International Journal of Medical Research Professionals