FindTrial
Sign In

Supreme LMA vs proseal LMA in terms of safety and efficacy

Prospective randomised study to compare safety and efficacy of LMA Supreme and LMA PROSEAL in anaesthetised spontaneously breathing patients undergoing minor gynaecological surgeries

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2019/09/021389
Enrollment
80
Registered
2019-09-23
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2021-11-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: O- Medical and Surgical

Interventions

Intervention1: Supreme LMA: oropharyngeal leak pressure Intervention2: supreme LMA: number of attempts, time taken for insertion, ease of insertion Control Intervention1: Laryngeal mask airway: suprem

Sponsors

Government mohan kumaramangalam medical college and hospital
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class I-II Aged 18-60 years Posted for elective surgery ASA class I-II

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Recent history of upper respiratory tract infection. Contraindications to the use of the LMA,such as a BMI more than 40 kgm2. Symptomatic hiatus hernia and severe oesophageal reflux disease

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
oropharyngeal leak pressureTimepoint: two months—

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
ease of insertion, number of attempts for insertion, time taken for insertion, pharyngolaryngeal adverse eventsTimepoint: two months—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Arunbalaji D

government mohan kumaramangalam medical college, salem

drkayalanaes@gmail.com

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026