ArticleJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
Laryngeal mask airway proseal versus laryngeal mask airway protector for laparoscopic surgery: A randomized comparative study.
Article in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Laryngeal Mask Airway Protector (LMPt) and Laryngeal Mask Airway Proseal (LMPs) have a high oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) but have not been compared for laparoscopic surgery. It was hypothesized that LMPs and LMPt have different clinical performances while managing the airway of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. The aim of the study was to compare the LMPs and LMPt for managing the airway of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Material and Methods: This was a prospective, single-blind, randomized, comparative trial. It included adult patients of either gender with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I/II planned for elective laparoscopic surgery. The airway of the recruited subjects was managed with either LMPs (group R, n = 60) or LMPt (group T, n = 60). OLP was the primary outcome variable. Number of attempts, insertion success, device insertion duration, ease of insertion, hemodynamics, gastric tube insertion, and complications were secondary outcome variables. Numerical data and dichotomous data were analyzed using student's Results: The OLP was statistically greater ( Conclusions: For patients undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery, both LMPt and LMPs are suitable for airway management, but LMPt provides a higher OLP. More trials are required to validate these findings across different surgical settings and patient populations.
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.