Skip to content

To compare the effectiveness of two different types of tubes

Comparative evaluation of ambu aura-I and fastrachTM intubating laryngeal mask airway for tracheal intubation: A Randomized controlled study

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2023/01/048788
Enrollment
50
Registered
2023-01-06
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2023-01-09

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: FastrachTM and Ambu aura-i LMA: Intubating the patient with a nortmal endotracheal tube of appropriate size through the means of FastrachTM and Ambu aura-i LMA Intervention2: Ambura Aur

Sponsors

S M Kushal
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: · Age 18 to 60 years · ASA 1 and 2

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: · Younger than 18 years old · American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status IV or V · Diagnosed with respiratory tract pathology or coagulation disorders requiring a nasal route for tracheal intubation · Those at risk of regurgitationâ??aspiration (previous upper gastrointestinal tract surgery, known hiatus hernia, esophageal reflux, peptic ulceration, or not fasted).

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
1) To evaluate the effectiveness of intubation with Fastrach TM LMA and Ambu aura-i in Anticipated Difficult Airway Management 2) To evaluate the time taken and number of attempts for intubation with FastrachTM and Ambu Aura-i in Anticipated Difficult Airway Management. Timepoint: 18 months

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
FastrachTM intubating LMA is better than Ambu aura-i LMATimepoint: 18 months

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr S M Kushal

Sri Devaraj urs medical college

ravijaggu@gmail.com9845287591

Outcome results

None listed

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