Comparison of Ambu AuraGain and BlockBuster laryngeal mask for controlled ventilation in children undergoing minor surgical procedures under general anesthesia: A prospective randomized controlled study
- PMID: 36866955
- DOI: 10.1111/pan.14653
Comparison of Ambu AuraGain and BlockBuster laryngeal mask for controlled ventilation in children undergoing minor surgical procedures under general anesthesia: A prospective randomized controlled study
Abstract
Background: Ambu AuraGain has proven to be better compared with other supraglottic airway devices in terms of higher first-attempt insertion success rate, time and ease of insertion, high oropharyngeal leak pressure, and fewer complications in children. The performance of the BlockBuster laryngeal mask has not been evaluated in children.
Aims: The primary objective of this study was to compare the oropharyngeal leak pressure of the BlockBuster laryngeal mask with those of the Ambu AuraGain during controlled ventilation in children.
Methods: Fifty children aged 6 months to 12 years with normal airways were randomized into group A (Ambu AuraGain) and group B (BlockBuster laryngeal mask). After administration of general anesthesia, an appropriate size supraglottic airway (size 1.5/2.0/2.5) was inserted according to the groups. Oropharyngeal leak pressure, success and ease of supraglottic airway insertion, gastric tube insertion, and ventilatory parameters were noted. The glottic view was graded by fiberoptic bronchoscopy.
Results: Demographic parameters were comparable. The mean oropharyngeal leak pressure in the BlockBuster group (24.72 ± 6.81 cm H2 O) was significantly higher than Ambu AuraGain group (17.20 ± 4.28 cm H2 O) by 7.52 cm H2 O (95% CI 4.27 to 10.76; p = 0.001). The mean time for supraglottic airway insertion in the BlockBuster and Ambu AuraGain group was 12.04 ± 2.55 s and 13.64 ± 2.76 s, respectively (mean difference- 1.6 s, 95% CI 0.09-3.12; p = 0.04). Ventilatory parameters, first-attempt supraglottic airway insertion success rate, and ease of gastric tube insertion were comparable between the groups. The BlockBuster group showed easy supraglottic airway insertion compared with the Ambu AuraGain group. The BlockBuster group had better glottic views with only the larynx seen in 23 out of 25 children compared to the Ambu AuraGain with only the larynx seen in 19 out of 25 children. No complication was noted in either group.
Conclusions: We found that the BlockBuster laryngeal mask has higher oropharyngeal leak pressure compared with Ambu AuraGain in a pediatric population.
Keywords: Ambu AuraGain; BlockBuster laryngeal mask; oropharyngeal leak pressure; pediatric airway; supraglottic airway devices.
© 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of the oropharyngeal leak pressure between three second generation supraglottic airway devices during laparoscopic surgery in pediatric patients.Paediatr Anaesth. 2022 Jul;32(7):843-850. doi: 10.1111/pan.14447. Epub 2022 Apr 5. Paediatr Anaesth. 2022. PMID: 35338764 Clinical Trial.
-
Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and insertion characteristics of Ambu AuraGain and i-gel in patients undergoing laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: A randomized control trial.J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2025 Jul-Sep;41(3):516-522. doi: 10.4103/joacp.joacp_439_24. Epub 2025 Jun 19. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2025. PMID: 40635825 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of clinical performance of Ambu® AuraGain™ and BlockBuster® in anaesthetised preschool children-A randomised controlled trial.Indian J Anaesth. 2023 May;67(5):420-425. doi: 10.4103/ija.ija_286_22. Epub 2023 May 11. Indian J Anaesth. 2023. PMID: 37333705 Free PMC article.
-
Laryngeal mask airway ProSeal provides higher oropharyngeal leak pressure than i-gel in adult patients under general anesthesia: a meta-analysis.J Clin Anesth. 2016 Sep;33:298-305. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2016.04.020. Epub 2016 May 18. J Clin Anesth. 2016. PMID: 27555181 Review.
-
Evaluation of i-gel(™) airway in children: a meta-analysis.Paediatr Anaesth. 2014 Oct;24(10):1072-9. doi: 10.1111/pan.12483. Epub 2014 Jul 16. Paediatr Anaesth. 2014. PMID: 25041224 Review.
Cited by
-
Reply to comments on "Comparative analysis of LMA Blockbuster® clinical performance: Blind versus Miller laryngoscope-guided insertion in paediatric general anaesthesia - A double-blinded, randomised controlled trial".Indian J Anaesth. 2025 Feb;69(2):254-255. doi: 10.4103/ija.ija_1159_24. Epub 2025 Jan 29. Indian J Anaesth. 2025. PMID: 40160908 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Endigeri A, Anilkumar Ganeshnavar BVS, Varaprasad SYHBA. Comparison of success rate of BlockBuster® versus Fastrach® LMA as conduit for blind endotracheal intubation: a prospective randomised trial. Indian J Anaesth. 2019;63:988-994.
-
- Ueshima H, Dds AY, Otake H. Use of the new supraglottic device Ambu AuraGain in clinical settings. J Clin Anesth. 2016;31:263-264.
-
- Joshi R, Rudingwa P, Kundra P, Sakthirajan Panneerselvam SKM. Comparision of Ambu AuraGain™ and LMA® ProSeal in children under controlled ventilation. Indian J Anaesth. 2018;62:455-460.
-
- Jagannathan N, Hajduk J, Sohn L, et al. A randomised comparison of the Ambu® AuraGain™ and the LMA® supreme in infants and children. Anaesthesia. 2016;71:205-212.
-
- Lopez-Gil M, Brimacombe J, Keller C. A comparison of four methods for assessing oropharyngeal leak pressure with the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in paediatric patients. Paediatr Anaesth. 2001;11:319-321.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources