Comparison of two airway devices named I-gel and Proseal LMA used to give anesthesia in children in different head and neck positions
Phase 3
- Registration Number
- CTRI/2015/09/006155
- Lead Sponsor
- PGIMERChandigarh
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Open to Recruitment
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- 70
Inclusion Criteria
children scheduled to undergo elective lower abdominal surgeries and urological procedures in supine position requiring general anaesthesia will be included in the study.
Exclusion Criteria
Upper respiratory tract infection (cough, fever, rhinorrhea) at the day of surgery,Respiratory tract pathology ( oropharynx, larynx ),Anticipated difficult airway,Children at increased risk of aspiration - Gastro esophageal reflux disease, non fasting status,Hiatus hernia,Lung diseases,Cardiorespiratory or cerebrovascular disease and Limited head and neck movements.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method To compare the oropharyngeal leak pressure of I gel with LMA Proseal in different head and neck positions i.e. neutral, maximum flexion, maximum extension.Timepoint: After 2 minutes of each position change namely after flexion,extension and neutral.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method â?¢We will also compare ease of insertion, insertion attempts, manoeuvres required, failed attempt and the hemodynamic response to insertion of the device. The ventilation scoring, Fiberoptic grading and passage of gastric tube in neural, maximum flexion and maximum extension with both the study devices will also be comparedTimepoint: ease of insertion, insertion attempts, manoeuvres required, failed attempt-Just after insertion of the device <br/ ><br>Hemodynamic response- every minute after intubation till 10 minutes of insertion of the device