The air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway vs the LMA-ProSeal TM: A prospective, randomised trial of airway seal pressure

R. E. Galgon, K. M. Schroeder, S. Han, A. Andrei, A. M. Joffe*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Scopus citations


We performed a prospective, open-label, randomised controlled trial comparing the air-Q® against the LMA-ProSeal™ in adults undergoing general anaesthesia. One hundred subjects (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1-3) presenting for elective, outpatient surgery were randomly assigned to 52 air-Q® and 48 ProSeal devices. The primary study endpoint was airway seal pressure. Oropharyngolaryngeal morbidity was assessed secondarily. Mean (SD) airway seal pressures for the air-Q® and ProSeal were 30 (7) cmH 2O and 30 (6) cmH 2O, respectively (p = 0.47). Postoperative sore throat was more common with the air-Q® (46% vs 38%, p = 0.03) as was pain on swallowing (30% vs 5%, p = 0.01). In conclusion, the air-Q® performs well as a primary airway during the maintenance of general anaesthesia with an airway seal pressure similar to that of the ProSeal, but with a higher incidence of postoperative oropharyngolaryngeal complaints. You can respond to this article at

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1093-1100
Number of pages8
Issue number12
StatePublished - Dec 2011

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway vs the LMA-ProSeal <sup>TM</sup>: A prospective, randomised trial of airway seal pressure'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this