Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

NCT number NCT03544749
Other study ID # 1803-124-932
Secondary ID
Status Completed
Phase N/A
First received
Last updated
Start date June 7, 2018
Est. completion date October 12, 2018

Study information

Verified date July 2019
Source Seoul National University Hospital
Contact n/a
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The supraglottic airway device(SAD), as an alternative to the endotracheal tube is inserted into the oral cavity and seals the upper esophagus and the surrounding tissue, effectively securing airway. SAD has evolved in recent years to increase efficiency and secure safety. The recently developed Ambu® AuraGain™ is a second-generation SAD with a built-in gastric port and is designed to be fitted well in the larynx and oral cavity after insertion because the shaft is bent at an angle of 90 degrees and has an inflatable cuff.

In a previous study, Ambu® AuraGain™ showed a higher sealing pressure and better fibreoptic finding compared to LMA Supreme in laparoscopic surgery.

On the other hand, I-gel and Ambu® AuraGain™, both of the second-generation SAD, show comparatively excellent performance according to the results of previous studies. However, there are no studies comparing the characteristics of two airway devices in adults.

The purpose of this study is to compare the performance of I-gel and Ambu® AuraGain™ to make a difficult airway-like situation using cervical collar for adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation under general anesthesia.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Completed
Enrollment 104
Est. completion date October 12, 2018
Est. primary completion date September 27, 2018
Accepts healthy volunteers No
Gender All
Age group 20 Years and older
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria:

- Patients who are undergoing surgery under general anesthesia where supraglottic airway management will be appropriate.

Exclusion Criteria:

- Body mass index > 35 kg/m2

- High risk of regurgitation (hiatus hernia, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, non-fasting status)

- Criteria for difficult airway

- Patients with cervical disease or previous cervical spine surgery

Study Design


Related Conditions & MeSH terms


Intervention

Device:
Ambu® AuraGain™
After induction of anesthesia, Ambu® AuraGain™ will be inserted for the mechanical ventilation.
I-gel
After induction of anesthesia, I-gel will be inserted for the mechanical ventilation.

Locations

Country Name City State
Korea, Republic of Seoul National University Hospital Seoul

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
Seoul National University Hospital

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Korea, Republic of, 

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary Oropharyngeal leak pressure Oropharyngeal leak pressure is measured by closing the expiratory valve and administering fresh gas flow of 6 L/min, until the equilibrium pressure is reached (to a maximum of 40 cm of H2O). At an average of 30 seconds after insertion of laryngeal mask airway
Secondary Oropharyngeal leak pressure Oropharyngeal leak pressure is measured by closing the expiratory valve and administering fresh gas flow of 6 L/min, until the equilibrium pressure is reached (to a maximum of 40 cm of H2O). At 5 minute after insertion of laryngeal mask airway
Secondary The time for successful insertion of the device The total time is measured from the removal of the face mask until bilateral chest rise with the first capnogram upstroke. During induction of anesthesia, an average of 60 seconds
Secondary Success rate in first attempt Successful insertion of laryngeal mask airway in a first attempt During induction of anesthesia, an average of 60 seconds
Secondary Overall success rate Successful insertion of laryngeal mask airway in a maximum of three attempts During induction of anesthesia, an average of 60 seconds
Secondary The ease of insertion of device The ease of placement was assessed using a subjective scale of 1-4 (1= no resistance, 2 = moderate resistance, 3 = high resistance, 4 = inability to place the device) During induction of anesthesia, an average of 60 seconds
Secondary The number of attempts at insertion of device The number of attempts for successful insertion of laryngeal mask airway During induction of anesthesia, an average of 60 seconds
Secondary The ease of gastric tube placement The ease of gastric tube placement was graded on a subjective scale (1 = easy, 2 = difficult, 3 = unable to pass) During induction of anesthesia, an average of 5 minutes
Secondary The time for successful gastric tube placement The insertion time is measured from first handling of the gastric tube to confirmation of its position in the stomach by aspiration of gastric fluid. During induction of anesthesia, an average of 5 minutes
Secondary The grade of fiberoptic bronchoscopic view The fiberoptic bronchoscopic view is defined as Grade 1, larynx only seen; Grade 2, larynx and epiglottis posterior surface seen; Grade 3, larynx, and epiglottis tip or anterior surface seen—visual obstruction of epiglottis to larynx: < 50%; Grade 4, epiglottis down-folded, and its anterior surface seen—visual obstruction of epiglottis to larynx: > 50%; Grade 5, epiglottis downfolded and larynx cannot be seen directly. During induction of anesthesia, an average of 5 minutes
Secondary Peak inspiratory pressure Peak inspiratory pressure is recorded from mechanical ventilator. At 5 minute after insertion of laryngeal mask airway
Secondary The number of airway maneuvers required to maintain airway patency Airway maneuvers required to maintain airway patency, including jaw thrust, head/neck extension and/or device adjustments such as advancement/withdrawal of device, and alterations to cuff volume. During the surgery, an average of 2 hours after anesthesia induction
Secondary The type of airway maneuvers required to maintain airway patency Airway maneuvers required to maintain airway patency, including jaw thrust, head/neck extension and/or device adjustments such as advancement/withdrawal of device, and alterations to cuff volume. During the surgery, an average of 2 hours after anesthesia induction
Secondary Intraoperative complications Intraoperative complications including coughing, laryngospasm, bronchospasm, hypoxia (SpO2 < 90%), regurgitation, aspiration, blood staining of the device. During the surgery, an average of 2 hours after anesthesia induction
Secondary Postoperative complications Postoperative complications including sore throat, hoarseness/dysphonia, jaw, neck or ear pain, persistent cough, tachypnea, stridor, hypoxia (SpO2 < 90%), nausea and vomiting. An average of 2 hours after extubation
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Not yet recruiting NCT05535127 - Sequential Strategy vs Palpation vs Routine Ultrasound for Detection of Cricothyroid Membrane N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT05036460 - Real-time Sonography in Detecting Inadvertent Esophageal Intubation Among Difficult Intubation Patients N/A
Completed NCT05303948 - Evaluation of Two Positions for Free Floating Tracheal Intubation in Weightlessness N/A
Completed NCT06107751 - Ramped and Sniffing Position for Cesarean Section Intubation. N/A
Completed NCT04089540 - New Intubation Method to Achieve Circulatory Stability and to Reduce Number of Intubation Attempts in Neonates N/A
Completed NCT05522049 - Videolaryngoscopic Intubation Using Macintosh vs.Hyperangulated Blades in Patients With Expected Difficult Intubation N/A
Completed NCT03046966 - Manikin To Patient Intubation: Does It Translate? N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT05130645 - Evaluation of Mandibular Mental Angle and Mandibular Profile Angle
Completed NCT06042829 - Impact of Covid-19 Aerosol Box On Intubation Success Rate N/A
Completed NCT06138119 - The Impact of Gender Stereotypes on Fiberoptic Intubation Performance N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT06115694 - Comparison of Video Laryngoscopy With Rigid Stylet vs Video Laryngoscopy With the TCI Articulating Introducer for Endotracheal Intubation in Simulated Difficult Airways N/A
Completed NCT05243758 - Who is Rapid And Success? The Comparison Of Video Fiberscope And Video Laryngoscope N/A
Completed NCT04833166 - Comparing Full vs. Partial Glottis View Using CMAC D-Blade Video Laryngoscope in Simulated Cervical Injury Patient N/A
Completed NCT03118596 - Fibre-optic Guided Tracheal Intubation Through SADs N/A
Recruiting NCT05680909 - Evaluation of SaCo Videolaryngeal Mask Airway in Morbidly Obese
Recruiting NCT05429112 - Flexible Tip Bougie vs Tube With Stylet for Intubation With a Videolaryngoscopy in ICU (VIDEOL-FLEXTIP) N/A
Completed NCT05833347 - Evaluation of Difficult Laryngoscopy With Ultrasonography in Pediatric Patients
Completed NCT05366582 - Neural Integrity Monitor Electromyogram (NIM-EMG) Endotracheal Tube Intubation With Video Laryngoscope N/A
Recruiting NCT06322719 - Hyperangulated vs Macintosh Blades for Intubation With Videolaryngoscopy in ICU N/A
Recruiting NCT06213389 - Comparison of EzVision® Videolaryngoscope and Gum Elastic Bougie-Assisted Machintosh Laryngoscopy N/A