ArticleJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
Comparison of gastric insufflation between LMA Protector and i-gel using ultrasound in adult patients - A randomized controlled trial.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Second-generation supraglottic airway devices (SADs) have the risk of gastric insufflation and aspiration with positive pressure ventilation. Gastric ultrasound is an emerging point-of-care tool used to assess gastric volume and evaluate perioperative aspiration risk. Hence, we planned this study to compare gastric insufflation using ultrasound between the LMA Protector and i-gel. The primary outcome was to compare the antral cross-sectional area (CSA) between the two SADs. Secondary outcomes included comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure, peak airway pressure, and postoperative complications. Material and Methods: After institutional ethics committee approval and trial registration, 92 patients aged 18-60 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I/II/III were recruited. Patients were randomly allocated to groups I (i-gel) and Results: The mean antral CSA (cm Conclusion: Both LMA Protector and i-gel functioned comparably in terms of gastric insufflation.
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.