ArticleJournal of feline medicine and surgery2024
Placement of the feline V-gel Advanced supraglottic airway device and tracheal selectivity during controlled mechanical ventilation: a clinical and tomodensitometric evaluation.
Article in Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 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.
- Evaluation of the V-gelVeterinary sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aims of the study was to assess the placement of the V-gel Advanced (V-gel-A) and to evaluate tracheal selectivity during controlled mechanical ventilation, using CT.
methodsIn this prospective clinical study, 20 healthy cats undergoing general anaesthesia for an elective procedure underwent four successive CT scans from the nose to the mid-abdomen: at baseline (no device); after the placement of the V-gel-A, after a controlled mechanical ventilation (CMV) period of 5 mins; and after the placement of an endotracheal tube (ETT). Using both a purpose designed position score and a gas score estimating the quantity of gas in different digestive regions, the position of the V-gel-A and presence of gas in the digestive tract at each step were evaluated. Number of attempts and times required to place the V-gel-A and ETT were recorded and compared.
resultsThe V-gel-A was found to be correctly placed, with position scores of 3/5 in six cats, 4/5 in 13 cats and 5/5 in one cat. Imperfect positioning was due to minor axial rotation or incomplete occlusion of the oesophagus by the tip of the device. The gas scores significantly increased after placement of the V-gel-A compared with baseline and after CMV was initiated. Correct positioning of the device was mostly achieved at the first attempt; no significant difference was found in the time required to place V-gel-A vs ETT, nor in the number of attempts ( CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The V-gel-A was clinically easy to place and use in both spontaneous and controlled ventilation. The device properly fitted the larynx and was never observed to occlude the airway. However, incomplete occlusion of the oesophagus was frequently observed and may lead to a lack of complete tracheal selectivity.
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.