AuraGain and iGel Crossover Comparison

NCT ID: NCT02644837

Last Updated: 2017-12-26

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

TERMINATED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

2 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2016-10-31

Study Completion Date

2017-08-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

This study will look at key performance indicators of 2 supraglottic airway devices in anaesthetised adults in a crossover manner.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

A supraglottic airway device (SAD), also referred to as laryngeal mask airway (LMA), is a medical device that maintains a patients airway, allowing unobstructed ventilation during anaesthesia. They are designed to sit in the patient's hypopharynx (throat), with their elliptical head forming a seal around the supraglottic structures (the patients "voice box"). They have been in common use since 1989, transforming anaesthetic practice and are now the predominant airway device within anaesthesia, being used in approximately 56% of all general anaesthetic cases in the UK(1). Their popularity for routine use stems from its perceived benefits over traditional forms of airway management coupled with their high overall success rate and low complication rate.

SADs, in anaesthetic practice, are inserted after induction of general anaesthesia, by or under supervision of, a trained medical professional. All patients are fully monitored as set out by the Association of Anaesthetist of Great Britain and Ireland; Recommendations for standards of monitoring during anaesthesia and recovery (2). Devices are used in concordance with manufacturer instruction. Successful first time placement is achieved in a large majority of patients and allows provision of oxygen and ventilation. In some patients, one device or size of device may present sub-optimal performance resulting in the removal of the device. Further actions in this scenario would include attempting a second insertion of the same device, attempting an insertion with an alternative size of the same device or a further attempt with an alterative design of device in order to achieve a patent airway. Further attempts may be taken but should be limited to avoid unnecessary trauma. In some cases the use of the SAD is abandoned and the patient is intubated with an endotracheal tube in order to provide a safe secure airway.

Alternatives to use of a SAD for airway management include use of a simple facemask or tracheal intubation with an endotracheal tube. Advantages of using a SAD for anaesthetic airway management compared to a facemask are improved oxygen saturation and less operator/anaesthetist fatigue. Compared to an endotracheal tube the advantages of using a SAD are improved haemodynamic stability at induction and emergence from anaesthesia, reduced anaesthetic requirements, improved quality of emergence, lower incidence of sore throat, increased ease of placement and reduced risk of dental damage. Risks of using an LMA compared to an endotracheal tube are increased gastric insufflation and aspiration with these being more common in patients who are poorly selected for anaesthesia with a SAD. Sore throat is the most common complication with a study

There have been significant developments in design in the SAD market in recent years with development of a "second generation" range of devices involving new materials and designs that integrate protective bite blocks, gastric drainage channels and improved supraglottic seal enhancing patient safety when using these devices. There are now some new "third generation" SADs on the market with designs that may enhance anaesthetic practice and improve patient safety further.

This study will follow similar ethically approved protocols used in published studies comparing airway equipment (3,4). These are only 2 examples but there are hundreds of LMA studies throughout the literature. The Ambu AuraGain is a new device and has not been studied fully. Comparative studies frequently assess oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), a fibre optic assessment of glottic alignment, ease of insertion, ability to insert a nasogastric tube down the gastric port and frequency of manipulations.

We propose a crossover design to better detect differences between the two devices as this eliminates confounding differences in patient characteristics and demographics.

There have been significant developments in design in the SAD market in recent years with

Our proposal would be to carry out a randomised crossover comparison between a new "third generation" SAD; the AuraGainTM (Ambu, Copenhagen, Denmark) and our current "second generation" SAD; the i-gel (Intersurgical Ltd, Wokingham, UK) to examine and compare key performance indicators with their use.

The AuraGain is a new device on the market and has not been compared to other devices yet.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Airway Management Laryngeal Mask Airway

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

CROSSOVER

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

i-Gel and AuraGain

In this arm of the crossover study, patients will undergo insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and iGel and will undergo initial management with the iGel. Primary and Secondary outcomes will be assessed. The initial device will be removed and subsequent Airway management will then be undertaken with the Ambu AuraGain and the same outcomes will be assessed.

Interventions with both devices will be

1. Insertion of the laryngeal mask airway
2. Assessment of ease of insertion
3. Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation
4. Measurement of OLP
5. Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope
6. Ability to insert nasogastric tube
7. Record number of manipulations
8. An assessment of device related trauma

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel

Intervention Type DEVICE

Insertion of Ambu AuraGain and iGel laryngeal mask airways in accordance with manufacturer instruction

Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope

Intervention Type DEVICE

Passage of Ambu a-scope fibrescope down shaft of laryngeal mask airway and assessment of alignment with glottis in relation to amount of glottis that is easily visualised

Ability to insert nasogastric tube

Intervention Type DEVICE

Passage of nasogastric tube down the gastric drainage channel of the device in accordance with manufacturer guidance

Measurement of OLP

Intervention Type DEVICE

Measurement of OLP by closing the adjustable pressure limiting valve against a constant fresh gas flow rate of 3 litres/minute

Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation

Intervention Type DEVICE

The ability to deliver 6 mls/kg volumes breaths by means of positive pressure ventilation will be assessed

Assessment of ease of insertion

Intervention Type DEVICE

Ease of insertion will be subjectively assessed by operator in relation to presence and nature of resistance to insertion of the device

Record number of manipulations

Intervention Type DEVICE

The number of manipulations/adjustments will be recorded for the second device only for the remainder of the device use during surgery until the patient wakes.

Assessment of device related trauma

Intervention Type DEVICE

Observation and assessment of any trauma caused by the insertion of the first device used

AuraGain and i-Gel

In this arm of the crossover study, patients will undergo insertion of the Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and i-Gel and will undergo initial management with the Ambu AuraGain.. Primary and Secondary outcomes will be assessed. Airway management will then be undertaken with the iGel device and the same outcomes will be assessed.

Interventions with both devices will be

1. Insertion of the laryngeal mask airway
2. Assessment of ease of insertion
3. Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation
4. Measurement of OLP
5. Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope
6. Ability to insert nasogastric tube
7. Record number of manipulations
8. An assessment of device related trauma

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel

Intervention Type DEVICE

Insertion of Ambu AuraGain and iGel laryngeal mask airways in accordance with manufacturer instruction

Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope

Intervention Type DEVICE

Passage of Ambu a-scope fibrescope down shaft of laryngeal mask airway and assessment of alignment with glottis in relation to amount of glottis that is easily visualised

Ability to insert nasogastric tube

Intervention Type DEVICE

Passage of nasogastric tube down the gastric drainage channel of the device in accordance with manufacturer guidance

Measurement of OLP

Intervention Type DEVICE

Measurement of OLP by closing the adjustable pressure limiting valve against a constant fresh gas flow rate of 3 litres/minute

Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation

Intervention Type DEVICE

The ability to deliver 6 mls/kg volumes breaths by means of positive pressure ventilation will be assessed

Assessment of ease of insertion

Intervention Type DEVICE

Ease of insertion will be subjectively assessed by operator in relation to presence and nature of resistance to insertion of the device

Record number of manipulations

Intervention Type DEVICE

The number of manipulations/adjustments will be recorded for the second device only for the remainder of the device use during surgery until the patient wakes.

Assessment of device related trauma

Intervention Type DEVICE

Observation and assessment of any trauma caused by the insertion of the first device used

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel

Insertion of Ambu AuraGain and iGel laryngeal mask airways in accordance with manufacturer instruction

Intervention Type DEVICE

Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope

Passage of Ambu a-scope fibrescope down shaft of laryngeal mask airway and assessment of alignment with glottis in relation to amount of glottis that is easily visualised

Intervention Type DEVICE

Ability to insert nasogastric tube

Passage of nasogastric tube down the gastric drainage channel of the device in accordance with manufacturer guidance

Intervention Type DEVICE

Measurement of OLP

Measurement of OLP by closing the adjustable pressure limiting valve against a constant fresh gas flow rate of 3 litres/minute

Intervention Type DEVICE

Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation

The ability to deliver 6 mls/kg volumes breaths by means of positive pressure ventilation will be assessed

Intervention Type DEVICE

Assessment of ease of insertion

Ease of insertion will be subjectively assessed by operator in relation to presence and nature of resistance to insertion of the device

Intervention Type DEVICE

Record number of manipulations

The number of manipulations/adjustments will be recorded for the second device only for the remainder of the device use during surgery until the patient wakes.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Assessment of device related trauma

Observation and assessment of any trauma caused by the insertion of the first device used

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* patients who have read and understood patient information leaflets about the study and undergo informed consent.
* patients whose anaesthesia management is being carried out by one of the named investigators
* adult (age \>18 years) patients undergoing general anaesthesia
* American Society of Anaesthesiology Grading (ASA) 1-3
* suitability for general anaesthesia using a laryngeal mask airway device

Exclusion Criteria

* the presence of significant acute or chronic lung disease
* pathology of neck or upper respiratory tract
* an identified or anticipated difficult intubation
* an increased risk of aspiration (hiatus hernia, gastro-oesophageal reflux or full stomach etc.) pregnant women
* a body mass index greater than 35kg.m-2
* patients unable to communicate fully in English.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

NHS Tayside

OTHER_GOV

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Simon M Crawley, MBChB FRCA

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Consultant Anaesthetist

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Ninewells Hospital

Dundee, Angus, United Kingdom

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United Kingdom

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2015AN07

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id