Comparison of Clinical Performance of C-MAC Video Laryngoscope Guided vs Blind Placement of I-Gel® in Paediatric Patients: A Randomized Controlled Open-Label Trial

Objective:Placement of the supraglottic airway devices under direct vision has been shown to decrease the incidence of malposition in adults. This study was designed to compare the clinical performance of C-MAC guided and blind placement of i-gel® in paediatric patients.Methods:The present prospective, randomized controlled study was conducted on 102 paediatric patients scheduled to undergo elective infraumbilical surgeries under general anaesthesia. Patients were randomly divided into group “B” (blind) and group “C” (C-MAC) based on the technique used for placement of i-gel®. The primary objective of the study was to compare the incidence of malposition based on the fiberoptic bronchoscope (FOB) score of the glottic view. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (OPLP), hemodynamic parameters, and insertion characteristics (time taken to insert and the number of attempts) were secondary objectives. Categorical data were presented as ratio or percentage and continuous data were presented as mean ± standard deviation or median [95% confidence interval (CI)].Results:The incidence of malposition (Brimacombe score 1 or 2) was significantly lower in group C compared to group B (7.8% vs 49% respectively) (P < 0.001); implying a relative risk reduction of 2.42 (95% CI 1.72 to 3.40) with C-MAC. On FOB assessment, the median (interquartile range) Brimacombe score was significantly better in group C [4 (4-4)] compared to group B [3 (2-3)] (P < 0.001). The OPLP was significantly higher in group C compared to group B. Other insertion characteristics were comparable in both the study groups.Conclusion:Compared to blind placement, C-MAC guided placement ensures proper alignment of i-gel® with periglottic structures and proper functioning of i-gel®

Comparison of volume controlled ventilation and pressure controlled ventilation in patients undergoing robot-assisted pelvic surgeries: An open-label trial

Background and Aims: Although volume controlled ventilation (VCV) has been the traditional mode of ventilation in robotic surgery, recently pressure controlled ventilation (PCV) has been used more frequently. However, evidence on whether PCV is superior to VCV is still lacking. We intended to compare the effects of VCV and PCV on respiratory mechanics and haemodynamic in patients undergoing robotic surgeries in steep Trendelenburg position. Methods: This prospective, randomized trial was conducted on sixty patients between 20 and 70 years belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status I–II. Patients were randomly assigned to VCV group (n = 30), where VCV mode was maintained through anaesthesia, or the PCV group (n = 30), where ventilation mode was changed to PCV after the establishment of 40° Trendelenburg position and pneumoperitoneum. Respiratory (peak and mean airway pressure [APpeak, APmean], dynamic lung compliance [Cdyn] and arterial blood gas analysis) and haemodynamics variables (heart rate, mean blood pressure [MBP] central venous pressure) were measured at baseline (T1), post-Trendelenburg position at 60 min (T2), 120 min (T3) and after resuming supine position (T4). Results: Demographic profile, haemodynamic variables, oxygen saturation and minute ventilation (MV) were comparable between two groups. Despite similar values of APmean,APpeakwas significantly higher in VCV group at T2 and T3 as compared to PCV group (P < 0.001). Cdynand PaCO2were also better in PCV group than in VCV group (P < 0.001 and 0.045, respectively). Conclusion: PCV should be preferred in robotic pelvic surgeries as it offers lower airway pressures, greater Cdynand a better-preserved ventilation-perfusion matching for the same levels of MV

Comparative evaluation of air-Q and classic laryngeal mask airway for surgeries under anesthesia: A randomized open-label trial

Objective: Classic laryngeal mask airway (cLMA) is a prototype supraglottic airway device, and Air-Q is a newly introduced device for use as a primary airway and as an aid for intubation. Due to paucity of literature comparing Air-Q with cLMA, this prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was performed, to evaluate their clinical performance as a primary airway conduit. Methods: Sixty patients of either sex with the American society of anesthesiology Grade I or II, weighing between 50 and 70 kg, were randomly allocated to either the cLMA (n = 30) or Air-Q (n = 30) group. After induction of anesthesia, the assigned airway device was introduced. The ease of insertion, vital parameters, oropharyngeal seal pressure (OSP), airway morbidity, and fiberoptic grades of laryngeal view was recorded. Results: There was no significant difference in ease of insertion, the time taken for successful device placement, number of attempts, or postoperative morbidities. Air-Q was found better with respect to hemodynamic stability during placement of the device. There was a significant difference in the OSP between the Air-Q (22.12 ± 1.740 cm H2O) and cLMA (16.28 ± 2.052 cm H2O), P < 0.001. Fiberoptic laryngeal view through Air-Q was also superior (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Air-Q was found to be superior to cLMA for controlled ventilation in view of better OSP and a superior fiberoptic laryngeal view

Comparison of clinical performance of Ambu® AuraGain™ and BlockBuster® in anaesthetised preschool children-A randomised controlled trial

Background and Aims: Supraglottic airway (SGA) devices are a boon to paediatric airway management. The clinical performances of the BlockBuster® laryngeal mask airway (LMA) and Ambu® AuraGain™ in preschool children were compared in this study. Methods: After ethical approval and trial registration, this randomised controlled study was conducted on 50 children, aged 1–4 years, randomised into two groups. Appropriate sized Ambu® AuraGain™ (group A) and LMA BlockBuster® (group B) were placed as per the manufacturer's recommendation under general anaesthesia. Appropriate size of the endotracheal tube was then chosen and inserted through the device. Primary objective of the study was to compare the oropharyngeal seal pressure (OSP), and secondary objectives were the first attempt intubation success rate, overall intubation success rate, SGA insertion time, intubation time, haemodynamic changes and postoperative pharyngolaryngeal complications. The Chi-square test was used to analyse the categorical variables, while the intragroup comparison of mean changes in outcomes was evaluated by the unpaired t-test. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05. Results: Demographic parameters were uniformly distributed in both the groups. The mean OSP in group A was 26.6 ± 0.95 cm H2O and in group B was 29.08 ± 0.75 cm H2O. Both the devices were successfully inserted in all the patients. The success rate of blind endotracheal intubation through the device in first attempt was 4% in group A and 80% in group B. Postoperative pharyngolaryngeal complications were relatively less in group B. Conclusion: LMA BlockBuster® provides higher OSP and provides a higher success rate of blind endotracheal intubation in paediatric patients

Comparison of nebulized dexmedetomidine and ketamine for premedication in pediatric patients undergoing hernia repair surgery: a randomized comparative trial

Background Allaying anxiety and providing calm children in the operating room is a challenging task for anesthesiologists. This study was designed to compare the use of nebulized dexmedetomidine and ketamine for premedication in pediatric patients under general anesthesia. Methods Seventy patients, aged 2 to 8 years of both sexes, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I/II scheduled for hernia repair surgery under general anesthesia, were randomized to two equal groups using a computer-generated random number table. Patients in group D received dexmedetomidine (2 µg/kg), and patients in group K received ketamine (2 mg/kg) by a jet nebulizer before the induction of anesthesia. The study's primary objective was comparing the level of sedation, which was achieved at 30 min after a study drug administration using the Ramsay sedation scale, between the two groups. The secondary objectives were the two-group comparison of parental separation anxiety scale, acceptance of the mask, hemodynamic variables, recovery time, incidence of emergence agitation, and adverse events. Results The median Ramsay sedation scale at 30 min was 3 (1–4) in group D and 3 (1–3) in group K (P = 0.002). Patients in group D had a more acceptable parental separation anxiety scale (P = 0.001) and a satisfactory mask acceptance scale (P = 0.042). Conclusions Nebulized dexmedetomidine (2 µg/kg) provided better sedation along with smooth parental separation and satisfactory mask acceptance during induction of anesthesia with a similar emergence agitation profile and adverse reactions compared to nebulized ketamine in pediatric patients

Mortality predictors during the third wave of COVID-19 pandemic: A multicentric retrospective analysis from tertiary care centers of Western India

Background: The COVID-19 has a varied mode of presentation in different regions of the world. This multicentric study was planned to evaluate the survival outcomes in intensive care unit-admitted patients admitted during the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on the basis of clinicodemographic profile and vaccination status. Methodology: Data from 299 patients admitted to three tertiary care centers in Western India were collected and analyzed. Based on survival outcomes, all patients were divided into two groups: survivors and nonsurvivors. Univariate analysis of the demographic profile, comorbidities, vaccination status, and disease severity was performed, whereas multivariate analysis was performed to predict independent factors associated with mortality. Results: Among total 299 studied patients, 208 (69.5%) patients survived and 91 (30.4%) did not. The number of elderly patients and patients with comorbidities such as diabetes, tuberculosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, and malignancy were more prevalent among nonsurvivors. Patients who did not receive a single dose of vaccine were higher in the nonsurvivor group (P = 0.037); however, no significant difference in survival outcome was found if patients had received the first or both doses of vaccine. The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score at 24 h after admission and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score at admission were significantly higher in nonsurvivors compared to survivors (P < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, APACHE II and SOFA scores were found to be independent predictors of outcome. Conclusions: Older age, presence of comorbidities, nonvaccination and higher disease severity scores affected mortality during the third wave of COVID-19