ArticleCureus2026
Comparison of BlockBuster® Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) and LMA® Supreme™ in Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia: A Prospective Study.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Although second-generation supraglottic airway devices have been established in routine anesthetic practice for more than two decades, newer devices such as the BlockBuster® laryngeal mask airway (BlockBuster® LMA; Teleflex Medical, Westmeath, Ireland) have been developed with design modifications intended to improve airway sealing and facilitate tracheal intubation. However, direct comparative clinical evidence between the newer BlockBuster® LMA and the well-established LMA® Supreme™ (Tuoren Medical Device Co., Ltd., Henan, China) remains limited, particularly in adult patients undergoing routine general anesthesia. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the BlockBuster® LMA and LMA® Supreme™ in adults undergoing surgery under general anesthesia. Materials and methods This prospective study included 72 adult patients who underwent elective surgery under general anesthesia. The patients were allocated to either the BlockBuster® LMA group or the LMA® Supreme™ group, with 36 patients in each group. Device insertion characteristics, airway performance, hemodynamic parameters, gastric tube insertion characteristics, end-tidal carbon dioxide values, and postoperative airway-related complications were assessed. Statistical analysis was performed, and a p<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Baseline demographic and airway characteristics were comparable between the groups. The BlockBuster® LMA demonstrated significantly superior airway performance, with a higher oropharyngeal leak pressure (32.33 ± 1.97 cmH₂O vs. 25.58 ± 2.41 cmH₂O; p<0.001). Easy insertion was achieved in 28 (38.9%) and 24 (33.3%) patients in the BlockBuster® LMA and LMA® Supreme™ groups, respectively. Airway manipulation was required in 14 (38.9%) and 20 (55.6%) patients, respectively. Easy gastric tube insertion was observed in 33 (45.8%) and 31 (43.0%) patients in the BlockBuster® LMA and LMA® Supreme™ groups, respectively. The number of insertion attempts, gastric tube insertion time, end-tidal carbon dioxide values, and hemodynamic parameters were comparable between the groups. Postoperative airway morbidity and device-related complications were infrequent and showed no significant intergroup differences in the present study. Conclusion Both devices provided effective and safe airway management during general anesthesia. However, the BlockBuster® LMA demonstrated higher oropharyngeal leak pressure, indicating improved airway sealing performance, while maintaining a safety profile comparable to that of the LMA® Supreme™. These findings support the use of both LMAs as reliable second-generation supraglottic airway devices in routine anesthesia practice.
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.