A Comparative Study Evaluating I-gel and Air-Q LMA for Ventilation in Anaesthetised and Paralysed Patients.
| dc.contributor.author | Bhandari, Geeta | |
| dc.contributor.author | Mitra, Subhro | |
| dc.contributor.author | Shahi, K S | |
| dc.contributor.author | Chand, Gyan | |
| dc.contributor.author | Tyagi, Abhilasha | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2016-02-29T06:46:34Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2016-02-29T06:46:34Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2015-04 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Background: The aim of study is to compare I-gel and Air-Q supraglottic airways in terms of - success rate of device insertion, number of attempts taken, haemodynamic parameters before and after device insertion, incidence of trauma and postoperative sore throat, dysphagia. Methods: This randomised single blind study was conducted on 90 patients of age 18-60 years, undergoing elective surgery requiring general anaesthesia. Patients were randomly allocated in two groups- Group I: I-gel (n= 45), Group II: Air-Q (n=45). After preoxygenation, induction and muscle relaxation appropriate size I-gel or Air-Q was inserted and all parameters were noted by an independent observer. For statistical analysis, Student t-test was employed to compare the means and Chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Complications were compared using Fisher’s exact test. Results: The demographic profile of patients in both groups was similar. In all patients supraglottic airway device was inserted within 3 attempts. Mean insertion time in first attempt for I-gel (25.85 ±1.7 sec) was found to be significantly lower than Air-Q (26.73±1.51 sec) [P=0.0128]. Conclusion: We conclude that I-gel is easier and safer than Air- Q when ventilation through LMA is intended during surgery. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | Bhandari Geeta, Mitra Subhro, Shahi K S, Chand Gyan, Tyagi Abhilasha. A Comparative Study Evaluating I-gel and Air-Q LMA for Ventilation in Anaesthetised and Paralysed Patients. Annals of International Medical and Dental Research. 2015 Apr-June; 1(1): 25-28. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://imsear.searo.who.int/handle/123456789/174677 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.source.uri | https://aimdrjournal.com/pdf/7OA.pdf | en_US |
| dc.subject | Air-Q | en_US |
| dc.subject | I-gel | en_US |
| dc.subject | Supraglottic airway | en_US |
| dc.title | A Comparative Study Evaluating I-gel and Air-Q LMA for Ventilation in Anaesthetised and Paralysed Patients. | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |