0 1049

Cited 33 times in

A randomized comparison of the i-gel with the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway in children

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author임영재-
dc.contributor.author한상원-
dc.contributor.author김민수-
dc.contributor.author이재훈-
dc.contributor.author이정림-
dc.date.accessioned2016-02-04T11:05:39Z-
dc.date.available2016-02-04T11:05:39Z-
dc.date.issued2015-
dc.identifier.issn1155-5645-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/139649-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Supraglottic airway devices with noninflatable cuff have advantages in omitting the cuff pressure monitoring and reducing potential pharyngolaryngeal complications. Typical devices without cuff inflation available in children are the i-gel and the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway (air-Q SP). To date, there is no comparative study between these devices in pediatric patients. AIM: The purpose of this randomized study was to compare the i-gel(™) and the self-pressurized air-Q(™) intubating laryngeal airway (air-Q SP) in children undergoing general anesthesia. METHODS: Eighty children, 1-108 months of age, 7-30 kg of weight, and scheduled for elective surgery in which supraglottic airway devices would be suitable for airway management, were randomly assigned to either the i-gel or the air-Q SP. Oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic view were assessed three times as follows: after insertion and fixation of the device, 10 min after initial assessment, and after completion of surgery. We also assessed insertion parameters and complications. RESULTS: Insertion of the i-gel was regarded as significantly easier compared to the air-Q SP (P = 0.04). Compared to the air-Q SP group, the i-gel group had significantly higher oropharyngeal leak pressures at all measurement points and significantly lower frequencies of gastric insufflation at 10 min after initial assessment and completion of surgery. The air-Q SP group had better fiberoptic views than the i-gel group at all measurement points. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that the i-gel had easier insertion and better sealing function, and the air-Q SP provided improved fiberoptic views in children requiring general anesthesia.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityopen-
dc.format.extent405~412-
dc.relation.isPartOfPEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/kr/-
dc.subject.MESHAirway Management/adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHAirway Management/instrumentation*-
dc.subject.MESHChild-
dc.subject.MESHChild, Preschool-
dc.subject.MESHCompressed Air-
dc.subject.MESHFemale-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHInfant-
dc.subject.MESHInfant, Newborn-
dc.subject.MESHInsufflation-
dc.subject.MESHIntubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHIntubation, Intratracheal/instrumentation*-
dc.subject.MESHLaryngeal Masks*/adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHLaryngoscopes-
dc.subject.MESHLaryngoscopy-
dc.subject.MESHMale-
dc.titleA randomized comparison of the i-gel with the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway in children-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Anesthesiology (마취통증의학)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMin-Soo Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJae Hoon Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSang Won Han-
dc.contributor.googleauthorYoung Jae Im-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHyo Jong Kang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJeong-Rim Lee-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/pan.12609-
dc.admin.authorfalse-
dc.admin.mappingfalse-
dc.contributor.localIdA03387-
dc.contributor.localIdA03098-
dc.contributor.localIdA03092-
dc.contributor.localIdA04285-
dc.contributor.localIdA00463-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ02478-
dc.identifier.eissn1460-9592-
dc.identifier.pmid25559870-
dc.identifier.urlhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pan.12609/abstract-
dc.subject.keywordairway management-
dc.subject.keywordanesthesia-
dc.subject.keywordchildren-
dc.subject.keywordclinical trial-
dc.subject.keywordlaryngeal mask airway-
dc.subject.keywordpediatrics-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameIm, Young Jae-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameHan, Sang Won-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, Min Soo-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameLee, Jae Hoon-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameLee, Jeong Rim-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorIm, Young Jae-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorLee, Jeong Rim-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorLee, Jae Hoon-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorHan, Sang Won-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, Min Soo-
dc.rights.accessRightsnot free-
dc.citation.volume25-
dc.citation.number4-
dc.citation.startPage405-
dc.citation.endPage412-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationPEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, Vol.25(4) : 405-412, 2015-
dc.identifier.rimsid52382-
dc.type.rimsART-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine (마취통증의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Urology (비뇨의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.