Comparison sion of two ILMA devices for intubation in patients receiving general anaesthesia
Not Applicable
Completed
- Conditions
- Health Condition 1: O- Medical and Surgical
- Registration Number
- CTRI/2022/05/042611
- Lead Sponsor
- Pt B D Sharma Pgims Rohtak
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Completed
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- 60
Inclusion Criteria
ASA GRADE 1 TO 3
MPG Score 1 TO 2
Weight 30KG to 70KG
Exclusion Criteria
patients who refuse to give consent
indication for rapid sequence induction
mouth opening (inter incisor distance ) < 3 cm
morbid obesity BMI >35kg/m2
ASA Grade 4
patients with loose dentures
MPG Grade 3 & 4
pregnancy
patients with increased risk of pulmonary aspiration or with any pathology of upper alimentary tract will not be included in the study
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method To compare the ease of insertion of endotracheal tube through BlockBuster and AmbuAura-iTimepoint: At the time of intubation
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method success rate of orotracheal intubation through BlockBuster LMA and AmbuAura-i <br/ ><br>Time taken for endotracheal intubation <br/ ><br>Post operative complications <br/ ><br>hemodynamic parametersTimepoint: Total time taken for successful intubation in seconds <br/ ><br>Hemodynamic parameters at minutes and 5 minutes <br/ ><br>Post Operative complications at one hour and 24hours