ArticleCureus2026
Clinical Evaluation of a Non-inflatable Visual Laryngeal Mask Airway: A Prospective Service Assessment in Elective and Difficult Airway Management.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe non-inflatable visual laryngeal mask airway (V-LMA, Tuoren Medical) integrates a high-definition optical channel with an anatomically pre-shaped, non-inflatable cuff, enabling real-time visualization and potentially reducing airway trauma. This prospective service assessment aimed to provide preliminary clinical data on the performance of the V-LMA in elective anesthesia and in predicted difficult airway management.
methodsThirty-eight adult patients were included, of whom eight had predicted difficult airways based on an El-Ganzouri Risk Index score >4. Primary outcomes included time to ventilation, quality of visualization, and seal performance. Secondary outcomes included gastric insufflation, need for repositioning, mucosal trauma, and postoperative symptoms.
resultsSuccessful device placement was achieved in all patients. The mean time to effective ventilation was 28 ± 4 seconds. Glottic visualization was consistently excellent in all cases. No gastric insufflation, postoperative mucosal injury, or patient-reported discomfort was observed. Device performance remained reliable even in patients with predicted difficult airways.
conclusionThe V-LMA enables rapid, atraumatic, and visually guided airway management, demonstrating excellent performance even in challenging airway conditions. It may serve as a useful first-line supraglottic airway device (SAD) when maintenance of oxygenation is the primary priority.
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.