Kaur Kiranpreet, Kaur Tavleen, Kumar Prashant, Bhardwaj Mamta, Kaur Svareen, Singhal Suresh K, Talwar Sakshi, Sandhu Paramjeet
Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Pt. B.D. Sharma PGIMS, Rohtak, Haryana, India.
Baba Saheb Ambedkar Medical College Rohini, Delhi, India.
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2025 Apr-Jun;41(2):292-297. doi: 10.4103/joacp.joacp_60_24. Epub 2024 Dec 16.
The present study was planned to compare two devices, namely LMA Blockbuster and LMA Protector, as a conduit for endotracheal intubation. The study aimed to compare the first-pass success rate of blind intubation, time taken for successful intubation, and ease of intubation through both devices.
This prospective randomized study was conducted on 100 patients of either sex aged 18-60 years, belonging to ASA physical status I-II, with 50 patients in each group (group B - LMA Blockbuster, and group P - LMA Protector). All the patients received general anesthesia. The primary objective was to compare the success rate, ease of blind tracheal intubation, time taken for intubation, and number of attempts. Secondary objectives included assessing the success of supraglottic device (SAD) placement, oropharyngeal seal pressure, and hemodynamic changes.
The insertion time of the SAD was 8.18 ± 3.66 and 10.94 ± 6.66 s for groups B and P, respectively. The SAD was placed on the first attempt in 96.0% of patients in group B and 88% of patients in group P. The total time taken for successful intubation was comparable between the groups ( = 0.239). The ETT was placed in the first attempt in 88% and 78% patients in group B and group P, respectively ( = 0.8).
We conclude that LMA Blockbuster and LMA Protector are both comparable and good intubating devices in terms of ease and success rate of intubation. However, LMA Blockbuster outperforms LMA Protector in terms of ease of insertion of SADs.
本研究旨在比较两种用于气管插管的装置,即LMA Blockbuster和LMA Protector。该研究旨在比较盲插的首次成功率、成功插管所需时间以及通过这两种装置进行插管的难易程度。
本前瞻性随机研究纳入了100例年龄在18 - 60岁、ASA身体状况为I - II级的男女患者,每组50例(B组 - LMA Blockbuster,P组 - LMA Protector)。所有患者均接受全身麻醉。主要目的是比较成功率、盲插气管的难易程度、插管所需时间以及尝试次数。次要目的包括评估声门上装置(SAD)放置的成功率、口咽密封压力和血流动力学变化。
B组和P组SAD的插入时间分别为8.18±3.66秒和10.94±6.66秒。B组96.0%的患者和P组88%的患者首次尝试就成功放置了SAD。两组成功插管的总时间相当(= 0.239)。B组和P组分别有88%和78%的患者首次尝试就插入了气管导管(= 0.8)。
我们得出结论,就插管的难易程度和成功率而言,LMA Blockbuster和LMA Protector都是相当且良好的插管装置。然而,在SAD的插入难易程度方面,LMA Blockbuster优于LMA Protector。