ArticleTurkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation2024
Comparison of Tracheal Intubation Using the Air-Q ILA and LMA Blockbuster Among Adults Undergoing Elective Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Air-Q intubating laryngeal airway (ILA) is associated with a 58-77% success rate in blind intubation. The newer laryngeal mask airway (LMA) blockbuster is specially designed to facilitate easier endotracheal intubation and may have a higher success rate. The current study aimed to compare the success rate of endotracheal intubation using the Air-Q ILA and LMA blockbuster. Methods: After ethics committee approval and informed written consent, 140 adult patients with normal airways who were scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia requiring endotracheal intubation were recruited for this randomized controlled trial. Blind endotracheal intubation was performed using the Air-Q ILA in group A and the LMA blockbuster in group B with special maneuvers and/or tubes in the second attempt. Fibreoptic bronchoscope (FOB) guidance was used in the third attempt if required. The primary outcome was the success rate of intubation without FOB assistance. The number of attempts for supraglottic airway (SGA) insertion, the time taken for SGA insertion, and the overall intubation time was also noted. Results: The success rate of intubation without FOB guidance was significantly higher in group B than in group A [91.4% vs 55.7%; relative risk (RR) 1.68; (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34, 2.11); p<0.0001]. The number of attempts for SGA insertion was similar in groups A and group B [87% vs 90%; RR 1.03; (95% CI-0.92, 1.16); p=0.60]. The times for successful SGA insertion and endotracheal intubation were also similar between the groups. Conclusion: The LMA blockbuster offers a significantly higher success rate for endotracheal intubation without FOB guidance than the Air-Q ILA in adult patients with normal airways. However, an increased success rate was achieved with the use of a specially designed flexible endotracheal tube and maneuvers.
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.