This study aims to compare endotracheal intubation using the Airtraq with bougie vs. the Airtraq without bougie with respect to: Time for intubation, Ease of intubation, Maneuvers employed to facilitate intubation, Number of attempts. MATERIALS AND METHODS This randomised prospective study was done with Seventy five patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia. 37 patients in group Airtraq (A) and 38 patients in group AB were studied. RESULTS All the demographic details of the patients ASA Physical status and airway parameter are insignificant in both groups, i.e. they are similar. There is no significant differences in the mean inter-incisor distance and the mean Thyro-Mental Distance between the study groups. The distribution of patients according to Modified Mallampati Class in the two groups were similar. When the two groups were compared with respect to the number of patients in each group requiring particular maneuvers to optimise glottic view and facilitate intubation, no statistical difference was observed. However, there was a statistically and clinically significant difference when the two groups were compared with respect to the number of patients requiring various maneuvers to optimise the glottic view to facilitate intubation. Four of seven patients in group Airtraq (A) who had trauma had also required additional maneuvers to facilitate intubation. One of these four had a grade 3 Cormack-Lehane view despite maneuvers and a second attempt was needed in two patients. In our study, trauma was observed more frequently in Airtraq (A) group. Its greater frequency in group Airtraq (A) as compared to Airtraq with bougie (AB) was both statistically and clinically significant. Majority of the patients in group Airtraq TM with bougie (AB) were intubated easily, but proportion did not reach statistical significance when compared with group Airtraq. TM
BACKGROUND Airway management is the most essential skill in anaesthesiology and inability to secure the airway is one of the most common reasons for major anaesthesia-related morbidities and mortalities. Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) has established role in modern anaesthetic practice. It is used for airway maintenance of spontaneously breathing patients who are undergoing elective short surgical procedures. The aim of the study is to evaluate the modified technique of insertion of LMA Classic™, which does not require the insertion of fingers into the patient's mouth as against the standard technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients were randomly allocated to one of two equal-sized groups (n=100).Patients were randomised to standard technique group (standard insertion technique with digital intraoral manipulation) or modified technique group (modified insertion technique without digital intraoral manipulation) using computer generated random number table and sealed envelope technique. RESULTS Both the groups were comparable with respect to distribution of age (0.935), weight (0.733) and sex (0.606) and the p values were nonsignificance. As indicated in Table 2, the groups were comparable with respect to American Society of Anaesthesiologists Physical Status of the patients. The duration of the entire surgical procedure was similar in both the groups. This implies that the duration for which the LMA Classic TM was in situ in the patient was comparable between the two groups. The incidence of postoperative sore throat was comparable in both the groups. Five patients who had blood on the LMA Classic TM at the end of the procedure had sore throat, 4 had sore throat after 1 hour and 1 after 24 hours. The glottic view obtained with the fiberoptic bronchoscope passed through the LMA Classic TM was comparable in both the groups. Though more number of patients (68 patients) had grade 1 view in the modified group compared to standard group (58 patients), it was not significant statistically. CONCLUSION We conclude that LMA Classic TM can be inserted successfully without the need to insert finger into patient's mouth with results comparable to that obtained by the standard index finger insertion technique.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.