Skip to content

Comparison of the LT® evo and other supraglottic airway devices (SGA) in elective (short) procedures – a prospective, randomized study

Comparison of the LT® evo and other supraglottic airway devices (SGA) in elective (short) procedures – a prospective, randomized study

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
DRKS
Registry ID
DRKS00037880
Enrollment
100
Registered
2025-09-10
Start date
2025-11-05
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-12-08

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

Conditions

Airway management during general anesthesia in elective procedures

Interventions

Group 1: Supraglottic airway management with the LT® evo during general anesthesia for elective procedures Group 2: Supraglottic airway management with the Ambu® AuraGain during general anesthesia for

Sponsors

Johannes Wesling Klinikum Minden, Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Adult patients (= 18 years) Scheduled elective surgery under general anesthesia requiring a supraglottic airway device ASA classification I–III Fasting status according to current guidelines Written informed consent after adequate explanation

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: - Known anatomical or functional contraindications to the use of supraglottic airway devices (e.g., known or suspected difficult airway, limited mouth opening, increased risk of aspiration, restricted cervical mobility) - Increased risk of aspiration (e.g., non-fasted patient, clinically relevant gastroesophageal reflux) - Planned fiberoptic intubation or intubation using videolaryngoscopy - ASA classification > III (at the discretion of the attending anesthesiologist) - Severe pulmonary comorbidities with unstable respiratory status - Known hypersensitivity to any of the materials - Participation in another clinical trial that could interfere with airway managemen

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Airway leak pressure (seal pressure of the airway device) at a cuff pressure of 60 cmH2O

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Success rate of insertion Duration of insertion Ventilation effectiveness Intraoperative stability Postoperative patient-reported complaints

Countries

Germany

Contacts

Public ContactGerrit Jansen

Johannes Wesling Klinikum Minden, Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin

gerrit.jansen@muehlenkreiskliniken.de+4957179054401

Outcome results

None listed

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