Comparison of two different supraglottic airway devices for laproscopic hernioplasty
Not Applicable
Completed
- Conditions
- Health Condition 1: null- patients with hernia.
- Registration Number
- CTRI/2016/10/007374
- Lead Sponsor
- Dr Richa Gupta
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Completed
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- 60
Inclusion Criteria
body weight 40-60kgs
Exclusion Criteria
Obese patients,known difficult airway, mouth opening <2.5 fingers, cervical spine disease, patients prone to aspiration such as hiatus hernia and GERD and emergency surgeries. Patients with systemic illness.Those patients who does not give consent to be part of the study are excluded from the study.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method a)To compare two supraglottic devices I gel vs LMA Proseal in terms of respiratory mechanics during positive pressure ventilation in laproscopic hernioplasty <br/ ><br> <br/ ><br>b)To study and compare two devices for ease of insertion and effectiveness of insertion. <br/ ><br>Timepoint: peak airway pressure, inhaled tidal volume, exhaled tidal volume, leak, minute ventilation, etco2 will be recorded 10 mins after placement of device, 10 mins after carboperitonium, 10mins after release of co2.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method a)To study the hemodynamic parameters with the above two devices in laproscopic hernia <br/ ><br> <br/ ><br> <br/ ><br>b)Study adverse events in the group in form of trauma to airway and post operative sore throat and other complications. <br/ ><br>Timepoint: hemodynamic parameters at 1, 3,5,7,10 and 15 mins after device insertion, and after removal of device. <br/ ><br> <br/ ><br>immediate post-operative complications and delayed post-operative complications (after 12 hrs of surgery).