Observational studyBMC emergency medicine2021
A prospective observational study comparing two supraglottic airway devices in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
Observational study in BMC emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of laryngeal tube evo with tracheal intubation during intra-arrest-ventilation using biphasic positive pressure ventilation - a prospective randomized controlled body donor study.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Trial
- Comparison of LTS-D and i-gel in non-paralyzed pediatric patients under general anesthesia: a randomized trial.Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2025Trial
- First responder airway and compression rate cluster randomized controlled trial: rational and design.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- A Critical Review on Misleading Evidence in Cardiac Arrest Trials-Why Less Complexity Does Not Result in Better Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- A survey of Advanced Life Support practices in countries implementing the European Resuscitation Council guidelines.Resuscitation plus · 2025Article
- Impact of endotracheal intubation versus laryngeal tube on gasometry and lactate at emergency department admission after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
- Implementation and use of a supraglottic airway device in the management of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest by firefighter first responders - A prospective feasibility study.Resuscitation plus · 2023Article
- A retrospective comparison of the King Laryngeal Tube and iGel supraglottic airway devices: A study for the CARES surveillance group.Resuscitation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAirway management in patients with out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is important and several methods are used. The establishment of a supraglottic airway device (SAD) is a common technique used during OHCA. Two types of SAD are routinely used in Norway; the Kings LTS-D™ and the I-gel®. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical performance of these two devices in terms of difficulty, number of attempts before successful insertion and overall success rate of insertion.
methodsAll adult patients with OHCA, in whom ambulance personnel used a SAD over a one-year period in the ambulance services of Central Norway, were included. After the event, a questionnaire was completed and the personnel responsible for the airway management were interviewed. Primary outcomes were number of attempts until successful insertion, by either same or different ambulance personnel, and the difficulty of insertion graded by easy, medium or hard. Secondary outcomes were reported complications with inserting the SAD's.
resultsTwo hundred and fifty patients were included, of whom 191 received I-gel and 59 received LTS-D. Overall success rate was significantly higher in I-gel (86%) compared to LTS-D (75%, p = 0.043). The rates of successful placements were higher when using I-gel compared to LTS-D, and there was a significant increased risk that the insertion of the LTS-D was unsuccessful compared to the I-gel (risk ratio 1.8, p = 0.04). I-gel was assessed to be easy to insert in 80% of the patients, as opposed to LTS-D which was easy to insert in 51% of the patients.
conclusionsOverall success rate was significantly higher and the difficulty in insertion was significantly lower in the I-gel group compared to the LTS-D in patients with OHCA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.