Comparison of the clinical performance of I gel and Ambu Aura Gain supra glottic airway devices in paediatric patients under controlled ventilation.
Not Applicable
- Conditions
- Health Condition 1: - Health Condition 2: K402- Bilateral inguinal hernia, withoutobstruction or gangreneHealth Condition 3: L029- Cutaneous abscess, furuncle and carbuncle, unspecified
- Registration Number
- CTRI/2019/05/019126
- Lead Sponsor
- Ashka V Surve
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- ot Yet Recruiting
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- 0
Inclusion Criteria
1.Patients age group 3-10 years
2.Either gender
3.Weight 10-35 kg
4.ASA physical status I/II
5.Patients admitted in SSGH and posted for 6.Elective surgeries requiring general anesthesia ( abdominal surgeries, upper limb surgeries, lower limb surgeries, head and neck surgeries etc. )
Exclusion Criteria
1.Patient with risk factors of difficult airway (mouth opening of < 2cm, mallampatti class III and IV, limited neck extension, history of previous difficult tracheal intubation).
2.Patients with recent upper respiratory tract infection.
3.Patient with any known pulmonary and cardiovascular diseases.
4.Patient with any conditions that increase the risk of gastro esophageal regurgitation.
5.Parents or guardian not willing for participation.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method The oropharyngeal seal pressure of I-gel is higher than Ambu Aura Gain in their individual studies. Whereas insertion of Ambu aura gain is faster than I-Gel.Timepoint: at 5 minute after insertion of the device, oropharyngeal leak pressure will be noted.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Secondary outcomes are haemodynamic and respiratory parameters.Timepoint: These secondary outcomes are observed throughout the duration of surgery.