Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Self-pressurized air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway versus the LMA® Classic™: a randomized clinical trial

Self-pressurized air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway versus the LMA® Classic™: a randomized... Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth (2018) 65:543–550 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-018-1082-6 REPORTS O F O RIGINAL I NVES TIGATIONS Self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway versus the TM LMA Classic : a randomized clinical trial ´ ´ Etude clinique randomisee du masque larynge d’intubation MD Self-pressurized air-Q versus le LMA Classic . . . Sang Hee Ha, MD Min-Soo Kim, MD, PhD Jiwoo Suh, MD Jong Seok Lee, MD Received: 26 July 2016 / Revised: 22 December 2017 / Accepted: 28 December 2017 / Published online: 6 February 2018 Canadian Anesthesiologists’ Society 2018 Abstract Results The mean (standard deviation [SD]) Purpose The self-pressurized air-Q (air-Q SP) oropharyngeal leak pressure just after insertion was intubating laryngeal airway is a relatively new similar in the air-Q SP and LMA [16.8 (4.9) vs 18.6 supraglottic airway (SGA) device. The intracuff pressure (5.5) cm H O, respectively; mean difference, 1.8 cm H O; 2 2 of air-Q dynamically equilibrates with the airway pressure 95% CI, -0.5 to 4.2; P = 0.13] and did not differ at ten and adjusts to the patient’s pharyngeal and periglottic minutes following device insertion. Median [interquartile anatomy, potentially providing improved airway fit and range (IQR)] peak inspiratory pressure just after insertion seal. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie Springer Journals

Self-pressurized air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway versus the LMA® Classic™: a randomized clinical trial

Download PDF
8 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/self-pressurized-air-q-intubating-laryngeal-airway-versus-the-lma-d7TkxD98m0

References (36)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Anesthesiology; Pain Medicine; Intensive / Critical Care Medicine; Pneumology/Respiratory System; Cardiology; Pediatrics
ISSN
0832-610X
eISSN
1496-8975
DOI
10.1007/s12630-018-1082-6
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth (2018) 65:543–550 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-018-1082-6 REPORTS O F O RIGINAL I NVES TIGATIONS Self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway versus the TM LMA Classic : a randomized clinical trial ´ ´ Etude clinique randomisee du masque larynge d’intubation MD Self-pressurized air-Q versus le LMA Classic . . . Sang Hee Ha, MD Min-Soo Kim, MD, PhD Jiwoo Suh, MD Jong Seok Lee, MD Received: 26 July 2016 / Revised: 22 December 2017 / Accepted: 28 December 2017 / Published online: 6 February 2018 Canadian Anesthesiologists’ Society 2018 Abstract Results The mean (standard deviation [SD]) Purpose The self-pressurized air-Q (air-Q SP) oropharyngeal leak pressure just after insertion was intubating laryngeal airway is a relatively new similar in the air-Q SP and LMA [16.8 (4.9) vs 18.6 supraglottic airway (SGA) device. The intracuff pressure (5.5) cm H O, respectively; mean difference, 1.8 cm H O; 2 2 of air-Q dynamically equilibrates with the airway pressure 95% CI, -0.5 to 4.2; P = 0.13] and did not differ at ten and adjusts to the patient’s pharyngeal and periglottic minutes following device insertion. Median [interquartile anatomy, potentially providing improved airway fit and range (IQR)] peak inspiratory pressure just after insertion seal.

Journal

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie – Springer Journals

Published: Feb 6, 2018

There are no references for this article.