The air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway vs the LMA-ProSealTM: a prospective, randomised trial of airway seal pressure*

Abstract

Summary We performed a prospective, open-label, randomised controlled trial comparing the air-Q® against the LMA-ProSeal™ in adults undergoing general anaesthesia. One hundred subjects (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1–3) presenting for elective, outpatient surgery were randomly assigned to 52 air-Q® and 48 ProSeal devices. The primary study endpoint was airway seal pressure. Oropharyngolaryngeal morbidity was assessed secondarily. Mean (SD) airway seal pressures for the air-Q® and ProSeal were 30 (7) cmH2O and 30 (6) cmH2O, respectively (p = 0.47). Postoperative sore throat was more common with the air-Q® (46% vs 38%, p = 0.03) as was pain on swallowing (30% vs 5%, p = 0.01). In conclusion, the air-Q® performs well as a primary airway during the maintenance of general anaesthesia with an airway seal pressure similar to that of the ProSeal, but with a higher incidence of postoperative oropharyngolaryngeal complaints.

A randomised comparison of the self‐pressurised air‐QTM intubating laryngeal airway with the LMA UniqueTM in children*

“…The airway leak pressures of the air-Q SP in this study were also similar to those reported with both the size-2 air-Q with an inflatable cuff [4,6] and the size-2 air-Q SP [7] in children, but lower than in adult patients [3,17]. The LMA Unique airway leak pressures at 10 min in this study were higher than with other randomised trials on the paediatric-sized classic LMA [14,18,19], and LMA Unique [13,16].…”

“…This feature of the air-Q SP may provide for easier device insertion, reduced risk for prolonged overinflation of the cuff and pressure-related injuries to the pharyngeal mucosa without the need for cuff pressure monitoring. Studies have shown the original air-Q to be an effective device for airway maintenance [3,4], and as a conduit for tracheal intubation in both adults [5] and children [6]. To date, only one observational study has been reported using the air-Q SP in children [7], and there are no randomised studies using this device in either adults or children.…”

Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure of air-Q™,i-gel™, and laryngeal mask airway supreme™ in adult patients during general anesthesia: A randomized controlled trial

“…[1216] On the other hand, reported mean OLP in adult patients in case of air-Q™ ranges between 19 cm and 30 cm H 2 O. [171819] However, it should be remembered that reported OLP for a supraglottic airway device depends on several factors such as use of muscle relaxant, methods of measurement, and type of ventilation (controlled vs. spontaneous respiration). We have found that time taken for air-Q™ insertion was significantly more than i-gel™ as well as LMA-S™ and insertion time is similar between i-gel™ and LMA-S™.…”

Recurrent laryngeal nerve injury associated with Air-Q

“…The study concluded that the air-Q performs well as a primary airway during the maintenance of general anaesthesia but with a higher incidence of postoperative oropharyngolaryngeal complaints. 1 Factors that may have contributed to the injury in our patient are upper arm surgery with lot of traction, head firmly taped to the table, use of N2O, prolonged procedure and unmonitored cuff pressure.…”

“…1 Head was placed on a head ring in neutral position. Anaesthesia was maintained with isoflurane, N2O and oxygen.…”