Comparison of the success rate of intubation between the LMA fastrach and AirQ-ILA methods in patients undergoing elective surgery during general anaesthesia

Siamdoust, S.S. and Rokhtabnak, F. and Motlagh, S.D. and Rahimzadeh, P. and Hassani, V. and Farnaghizad, M. (2018) Comparison of the success rate of intubation between the LMA fastrach and AirQ-ILA methods in patients undergoing elective surgery during general anaesthesia. Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, 8 (4).

[img] Text
Comparison-of-the-success-rate-of-intubation-between-the-LMA-fastrach-and-AirQILA-methods-in-patients-undergoing-elective-surgery-during-general-anaesthesia2018Anesthesiology-and-Pain-Medicine.pdf

Download (141kB)
Official URL: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2....

Abstract

Background: Rapid placement of a reliable airway is the most important task in anesthesia practice. Airway management is a critical skill to provide safe anesthesia since morbidity. In addition, mortality due to anesthesia could be linked to difficulty or failure in airway management. In this study, intubation success was compared between two methods, AirQ-ILA and LMAfastrach, among candidates for elective surgery under general anesthesia. Methods: In this clinical trial, patients, who were candidates for elective surgery under general anesthesia at Firoozgar and Rasoul Akram Hospitals, were randomly divided into LMAfastrach and AirQ-ILA groups. Heart rate before and after induction and intubation, diastolic blood pressure, systolic blood pressure, duration of device insertion, intubation time, number of attempts until successful device insertion and trachea intubation, and success or failure in the insertion of the device and the tube were recorded; as for statistical analysis, SPSS version 21 was considered. Results: In comparison with the LMAfastrach group, the device insertion time and intubation time were significantly longer in the AirQ-ILA group (P < 0.05). However, the groups showed no significant difference regarding the number of device and tube insertion attempts (P > 0.05). Moreover, no significant difference was observed in the success of device insertion and intubation in either LMAfastrach or AirQ-ILA group (P >0.05). Conclusions: The LMAfastrach and AirQ-ILA methods were not significantly different regarding the success of airway instrument application and intubation, while the device insertion time and intubation time were significantly longer in the AirQ-ILA group in comparison with the LMAfastrach group. © 2018, Author(s).

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: cited By 0
Subjects: WO Surgery
QV Pharmacology
Depositing User: eprints admin
Date Deposited: 24 Dec 2018 07:33
Last Modified: 02 Jul 2019 08:02
URI: http://eprints.iums.ac.ir/id/eprint/6325

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item