MedPath

COMPARISON OF RESPIRATORY COMPLICATIONS WITH MICROCUFF ENDOTRACHEAL TUBES AND LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY IN PAEDIATRIC PATIENTS

Not Applicable
Conditions
Health Condition 1: O- Medical and Surgical
Registration Number
CTRI/2023/10/058407
Lead Sponsor
Department of Anaesthesiology SMS Medical College and attached Hoapitals Jaipur
Brief Summary

Not available

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
ot Yet Recruiting
Sex
Not specified
Target Recruitment
0
Inclusion Criteria

1.ASA I and II

2.Weight between 10 to 30 kg

3.Elective inguinal, urology procedure for which patients are intubated with ETT or LMA.

4.Patient willing to participate in study

Exclusion Criteria

1.Patient with acute respiratory infection.

2.Patient with difficult airway.

3.Emergency surgeries.

Study & Design

Study Type
Interventional
Study Design
Not specified
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
1.To determine the difference in perioperative respiratory complications with microcuff endotracheal tubes versus laryngeal mask airway(Blockbuster). <br/ ><br> <br/ ><br>Timepoint: <br/ ><br>After insertion of device
Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
To determine the difference in hemodynamic parameters with microcuff ETT versus LMA(Blockbuster).Timepoint: Baseline <br/ ><br>After induction of anaesthesia. <br/ ><br>Immediately after intubation. <br/ ><br>1 mins after intubation <br/ ><br>3 mins after intubation <br/ ><br>5 mins after intubation <br/ ><br>7 mins after intubation <br/ ><br>10 mins after intubation;To determine the difference in time taken to secure the airway with microcuff ETT versus LMA(Blockbuster).Timepoint: After insertion of device;To determine the difference in number of attempts to secure the airway with microcuff ETT versus LMA(Blockbuster).Timepoint: After insertion of device
© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath