A randomised comparison of the Ambu® AuraGain and the LMA® supreme in infants and children

N. Jagannathan*, J. Hajduk, L. Sohn, A. Huang, A. Sawardekar, E. R. Gebhardt, K. Johnson, G. S. De Oliveira

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We conducted a randomised trial in 100 children in order to compare the clinical performance of the Ambu® AuraGain and the LMA® Supreme for airway maintenance during mechanical ventilation. The primary outcomes were initial and 10-min airway leak pressures. Ease, time and success rates for device and gastric tube insertion, fibreoptic grades of view, airway quality during anaesthetic maintenance, and complications were also assessed. There were no differences in the initial and ten min airway leak pressures between the Ambu AuraGain and LMA Supreme, median (IQR [range]) initial: 19 (16-22 [10-34]) vs 18 (14-24 [8-40]) cmH2O, p = 0.4; and ten min: 22 (18-26 [11-40]) vs 20 (16-26 [12-40]) cmH2O, p = 0.08, respectively. Ease, time and success rates for device placement, gastric tube insertion and complications were also not significantly different. Children receiving the LMA Supreme required more airway manouevers (7 vs 1 patient, p = 0.06) to maintain a patent airway. Our results suggest that the Ambu AuraGain may be a useful alternative to the LMA Supreme, as demonstrated by comparable overall clinical performance in children.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)205-212
Number of pages8
JournalAnaesthesia
Volume71
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2016

Fingerprint

Stomach
Maintenance
Pressure
Equipment and Supplies
Artificial Respiration
Anesthetics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

Jagannathan, N. ; Hajduk, J. ; Sohn, L. ; Huang, A. ; Sawardekar, A. ; Gebhardt, E. R. ; Johnson, K. ; De Oliveira, G. S. / A randomised comparison of the Ambu® AuraGain and the LMA® supreme in infants and children. In: Anaesthesia. 2016 ; Vol. 71, No. 2. pp. 205-212.
@article{be69276f5bda4b7d95455a94c93b6f6f,
title = "A randomised comparison of the Ambu{\circledR} AuraGain™ and the LMA{\circledR} supreme in infants and children",
abstract = "We conducted a randomised trial in 100 children in order to compare the clinical performance of the Ambu{\circledR} AuraGain™ and the LMA{\circledR} Supreme∗ for airway maintenance during mechanical ventilation. The primary outcomes were initial and 10-min airway leak pressures. Ease, time and success rates for device and gastric tube insertion, fibreoptic grades of view, airway quality during anaesthetic maintenance, and complications were also assessed. There were no differences in the initial and ten min airway leak pressures between the Ambu AuraGain and LMA Supreme, median (IQR [range]) initial: 19 (16-22 [10-34]) vs 18 (14-24 [8-40]) cmH2O, p = 0.4; and ten min: 22 (18-26 [11-40]) vs 20 (16-26 [12-40]) cmH2O, p = 0.08, respectively. Ease, time and success rates for device placement, gastric tube insertion and complications were also not significantly different. Children receiving the LMA Supreme required more airway manouevers (7 vs 1 patient, p = 0.06) to maintain a patent airway. Our results suggest that the Ambu AuraGain may be a useful alternative to the LMA Supreme, as demonstrated by comparable overall clinical performance in children.",
author = "N. Jagannathan and J. Hajduk and L. Sohn and A. Huang and A. Sawardekar and Gebhardt, {E. R.} and K. Johnson and {De Oliveira}, {G. S.}",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/anae.13330",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "71",
pages = "205--212",
journal = "Anaesthesia",
issn = "0003-2409",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

A randomised comparison of the Ambu® AuraGain and the LMA® supreme in infants and children. / Jagannathan, N.; Hajduk, J.; Sohn, L.; Huang, A.; Sawardekar, A.; Gebhardt, E. R.; Johnson, K.; De Oliveira, G. S.

In: Anaesthesia, Vol. 71, No. 2, 01.01.2016, p. 205-212.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A randomised comparison of the Ambu® AuraGain™ and the LMA® supreme in infants and children

AU - Jagannathan, N.

AU - Hajduk, J.

AU - Sohn, L.

AU - Huang, A.

AU - Sawardekar, A.

AU - Gebhardt, E. R.

AU - Johnson, K.

AU - De Oliveira, G. S.

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - We conducted a randomised trial in 100 children in order to compare the clinical performance of the Ambu® AuraGain™ and the LMA® Supreme∗ for airway maintenance during mechanical ventilation. The primary outcomes were initial and 10-min airway leak pressures. Ease, time and success rates for device and gastric tube insertion, fibreoptic grades of view, airway quality during anaesthetic maintenance, and complications were also assessed. There were no differences in the initial and ten min airway leak pressures between the Ambu AuraGain and LMA Supreme, median (IQR [range]) initial: 19 (16-22 [10-34]) vs 18 (14-24 [8-40]) cmH2O, p = 0.4; and ten min: 22 (18-26 [11-40]) vs 20 (16-26 [12-40]) cmH2O, p = 0.08, respectively. Ease, time and success rates for device placement, gastric tube insertion and complications were also not significantly different. Children receiving the LMA Supreme required more airway manouevers (7 vs 1 patient, p = 0.06) to maintain a patent airway. Our results suggest that the Ambu AuraGain may be a useful alternative to the LMA Supreme, as demonstrated by comparable overall clinical performance in children.

AB - We conducted a randomised trial in 100 children in order to compare the clinical performance of the Ambu® AuraGain™ and the LMA® Supreme∗ for airway maintenance during mechanical ventilation. The primary outcomes were initial and 10-min airway leak pressures. Ease, time and success rates for device and gastric tube insertion, fibreoptic grades of view, airway quality during anaesthetic maintenance, and complications were also assessed. There were no differences in the initial and ten min airway leak pressures between the Ambu AuraGain and LMA Supreme, median (IQR [range]) initial: 19 (16-22 [10-34]) vs 18 (14-24 [8-40]) cmH2O, p = 0.4; and ten min: 22 (18-26 [11-40]) vs 20 (16-26 [12-40]) cmH2O, p = 0.08, respectively. Ease, time and success rates for device placement, gastric tube insertion and complications were also not significantly different. Children receiving the LMA Supreme required more airway manouevers (7 vs 1 patient, p = 0.06) to maintain a patent airway. Our results suggest that the Ambu AuraGain may be a useful alternative to the LMA Supreme, as demonstrated by comparable overall clinical performance in children.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84954075275&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84954075275&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/anae.13330

DO - 10.1111/anae.13330

M3 - Article

VL - 71

SP - 205

EP - 212

JO - Anaesthesia

JF - Anaesthesia

SN - 0003-2409

IS - 2

ER -