Pediatric Anesthesia ISSN 1155-5645
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Comparison of air-Q and Ambu Aura-i for controlled ventilation in infants: a randomized controlled trial Vanlal Darlong1, Ghansham Biyani1, Dalim K. Baidya1, Ravindra Pandey1, Chandralekha1, Jyotsna Punj1 & Ashish D. Upadhyay2 1 Department of Anesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India 2 Department of Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
What is already known air-Q and Ambu Aura-i are effective supraglottic airway devices and conduits for intubation in older children.
What this article adds air-Q and Ambu Aura-i both show good performance and efficacy as primary airway device in infants. air-Q can be considered better for controlled ventilation as it provides higher sealing pressure.
Implications for translation Newer supraglottic airway devices like Ambu Aura-i and air-Q can be used effectively in infants. However, further studies should be conducted with larger number of patients to convincingly establish safety in this patient population.
Keywords air-Q; Ambu Aura-i; Infants; oropharyngeal leak pressure Correspondence Dalim Kumar Baidya, Department of Anesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Room No – 5018, 5th Floor, Teaching Block, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi 110029, India Email: [email protected] Section Editor: Jerrold Lerman Accepted 16 March 2015 doi:10.1111/pan.12663
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Pediatric Anesthesia 25 (2015) 795–800
Summary Background: The air-Q is a new supraglottic airway device (SAD) and has been increasingly used as a primary airway device and as a conduit for tracheal intubation in children as well as in adults. This device has either performed equally or better than other SADs in children. The Ambu Aura-i is a commonly used SAD in children undergoing various short surgical procedures. However, limited literature is available evaluating the safety and efficacy of the air-Q and the Ambu Aura-i in small children. We, therefore, conducted this study to compare the clinical performance of these two airway devices in infants weighing up to 10 kg. Our hypothesis is that air-Q, due to its improved and larger cuff design will yield better airway seal pressures as compared with the Ambu Aura-i. Methods: Sixty-four ASA I–II infants weighing
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Comparison of air-Q and Ambu Aura-i for controlled ventilation in infants: a randomized controlled trial Vanlal Darlong1, Ghansham Biyani1, Dalim K. Baidya1, Ravindra Pandey1, Chandralekha1, Jyotsna Punj1 & Ashish D. Upadhyay2 1 Department of Anesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India 2 Department of Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
What is already known air-Q and Ambu Aura-i are effective supraglottic airway devices and conduits for intubation in older children.
What this article adds air-Q and Ambu Aura-i both show good performance and efficacy as primary airway device in infants. air-Q can be considered better for controlled ventilation as it provides higher sealing pressure.
Implications for translation Newer supraglottic airway devices like Ambu Aura-i and air-Q can be used effectively in infants. However, further studies should be conducted with larger number of patients to convincingly establish safety in this patient population.
Keywords air-Q; Ambu Aura-i; Infants; oropharyngeal leak pressure Correspondence Dalim Kumar Baidya, Department of Anesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Room No – 5018, 5th Floor, Teaching Block, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi 110029, India Email: [email protected] Section Editor: Jerrold Lerman Accepted 16 March 2015 doi:10.1111/pan.12663
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Pediatric Anesthesia 25 (2015) 795–800
Summary Background: The air-Q is a new supraglottic airway device (SAD) and has been increasingly used as a primary airway device and as a conduit for tracheal intubation in children as well as in adults. This device has either performed equally or better than other SADs in children. The Ambu Aura-i is a commonly used SAD in children undergoing various short surgical procedures. However, limited literature is available evaluating the safety and efficacy of the air-Q and the Ambu Aura-i in small children. We, therefore, conducted this study to compare the clinical performance of these two airway devices in infants weighing up to 10 kg. Our hypothesis is that air-Q, due to its improved and larger cuff design will yield better airway seal pressures as compared with the Ambu Aura-i. Methods: Sixty-four ASA I–II infants weighing
