A randomized controlled trial comparing three supraglottic airway devices used as a conduit to facilitate tracheal intubation with flexible bronchoscopy

PurposeOnce difficult ventilation and intubation are declared, guidelines suggest the use of a supraglottic airway (SGA) as a rescue device to ventilate and, if oxygenation is restored, subsequently as an intubation conduit. Nevertheless, few trials have formally studied recent SGA devices in patients. Our objective was to compare the efficacy of three second-generation SGA devices as conduits for bronchoscopy-guided endotracheal intubation.MethodsIn this prospective, single-blinded three-arm randomized controlled trial, patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status of I-III undergoing general anesthesia were randomized to bronchoscopy-guided endotracheal intubation using AuraGain (TM), Air-Q (R) Blocker, or i-gel (R) devices. We excluded patients with contraindications to an SGA or drugs and who were pregnant or had a neck, spine, or respiratory anomaly. The primary outcome was intubation time, measured from SGA circuit disconnection to CO2 measurement. Secondary outcomes included ease, time, and success of SGA insertion; success of intubation on first attempt; overall intubation success; number of attempts to intubate; ease of intubation; and ease of SGA removals.ResultsOne hundred and fifty patients were enrolled from March 2017 to January 2018. Median intubation times were similar across the three groups (Air-Q Blocker, 44 sec; AuraGain, 45 sec; i-gel, 36 sec; P = 0.08). The i-gel was faster to insert (i-gel: 10 sec; Air-Q Blocker, 16 sec; AuraGain, 16 sec; P < 0.001) and easier to insert (Air-Q Blocker vs i-gel, P = 0.001; AuraGain vs i-gel, P = 0.002). Success of SGA insertion, success of intubation, and number of attempts were similar. The Air-Q Blocker was easier to remove than the i-gel (P < 0.001).ConclusionAll three second-generation SGA devices performed similarly regarding intubation. Despite minor benefits of the i-gel, clinicians should select their SGA based on clinical experience.Study registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02975466); registered on 29 November 2016.

Automated summary

This study compared the efficacy of three second-generation SGA devices as conduits for bronchoscopy-guided endotracheal intubation. The results showed similar intubation times among the three groups, with the i-gel device being faster and easier to insert, and the Air-Q Blocker device being easier to remove. The study suggests that clinicians should choose the appropriate SGA device based on their clinical experience.