Comparing the efficiency and performance of AMBU AURA40 with proseal LMA
Not Applicable
Completed
- Conditions
- Health Condition 1: O- Medical and Surgical
- Registration Number
- CTRI/2023/03/050386
- Lead Sponsor
- Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical care
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Completed
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- 60
Inclusion Criteria
Adult patients aged between 18-60 years of either sex of ASA grade I and II scheduled for elective surgery requiring general anaesthesia and where placement of supraglottic airway device is indicated will be included.
Exclusion Criteria
Patients having respiratory or pharyngeal pathology, mouth opening <2.5 cms, Body mass index > 30 kg/m², pregnancy, full stomach, suspected difficult airway will be excluded.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method To compare the success rate of placement and OLP for the two devices <br/ ><br>Timepoint: Insertion time and number of attempts taken for placing the device noted.Hemodynamic changes assessed baseline,after induction,after insertion and 5 min after device placement.post op complications-immediate,after half an hour and after 1 hour
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Time taken for placement <br/ ><br>Number of attempts <br/ ><br>Haemodynamic variation <br/ ><br>Post-operative complicationsTimepoint: Hemodynamic changes assessed baseline,after induction,after insertion and 5 min after device placement.post op complications-immediate,after half an hour and after 1 hour will be assessed for both AMBU AURA40 and Proseal LMA. Data will be compiled and appropriate statistical tests will be used to analyse the results