ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2023
Comparison of clinical performance of Baska mask and Ambu AuraGain in patients undergoing surgery: A single-blinded, randomised comparative trial.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical performance of i-gel and i-gel Plus for airway management of obese patients: A prospective randomised controlled trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Comparison of i-gel®, Ambu® AuraGain™, Baska Mask, LMA® Protector™ for airway management of obese surgical patients - A randomised comparative study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Laryngeal mask airway proseal versus laryngeal mask airway protector for laparoscopic surgery: A randomized comparative study.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: The Baska mask (BM) and the Ambu AuraGain (AAG) have shown promising results in recent trials but have not been compared. Therefore, we aimed to compare the clinical performance of the BM and the AAG for airway management of adult patients. Methods: In this randomised comparative study, patients aged 18-60 years and with an expected surgical duration of less than 2 h were enroled. Patients were randomly allocated to AAG (Group A, Results: Baseline and demographic characteristics were comparable. OLP (31.32 ± 2.59 versus 27.54 ± 1.32 cmH Conclusion: Clinical performance of BM was better than AAG as the former had higher OLP, lower LF and complications.
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.