Skip to content

I-gel vs Ambu AuraGain in Laparoscopic Gynecological Surgery

Comparison of I-gel and Ambu AuraGain Without Neuromuscular Blocker in Laparoscopic Gynecological Surgery

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03760692
Enrollment
102
Registered
2018-11-30
Start date
2018-11-01
Completion date
2024-12-01
Last updated
2022-03-28

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

Conditions

Airway Morbidity, Anesthesia

Keywords

supraglottic airway device, laparoscopic gynecological surgery

Brief summary

To compare the effects of i-gel and Ambu AuraGain on ventilation parameters and surgical view during Trendelenburg position laparoscopic gynecological surgery in cases administered positive pressure ventilation without the use of neuromuscular agents.

Detailed description

Prospective, multicenter, randomized and double-blind study, aged from 18 to 65 years undergoing elective laparoscopic gynecological surgery. The patients are randomly assigned to 2 groups: Group i-gel Group Ambu AuraGain Procedure: The investigation protocol contains the following sections: 1. Induction of anaesthesia. For preoperative sedation 0.02 mg/kg midazolam IV will be administered. 2 minutes of 0.2 µ/kg/min remifentanil and 6 mg kg st-1 propofol infusion, IV 1-2 mg kg-1 propofol . No muscle relaxant will be used for insertion of the airway device. 2. Bispectral index values will be held between 40-60.Bispectral index values will be within this interval by increasing or decreasing propofol infusion by 1 mg/kg after additional bolus dose of propofol (1 mg/kg). 3. Insertion of the airway device. The size of the airway device used is based on the manufacturers' recommendations. 4. Anesthesia maintenance will be ensured by 50% O2/air with 0.1-0.4 µ kg/min-1 remifentanil and 4-10 mg/kg/hr propofol IV infusion 5. Functionality of the gastric drainage channel of the airway device 6. Measurement of airway seal pressure (oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP): at baseline, and at 2 minutes after airway device insertion (T1), 10 minutes after insufflation (T2), before desufflation (T3), before removal of airway device (T4). The maximum pressure allowed is 40 cm H2O. 7. Ventilatory mechanics and parameters and hemodynamic parameters are measured at baseline, and at T1, T2, T3 and T4. 8. Perioperative complications: Cough, vomiting, laryngeal spasm, laryngeal Stridor, airway intervention requirements, hypoxia (SpO2 \< 92%) 9. Removal of the airway device: Presence of blood - 3 level grading (1:no blood; 2: trace amounts of blood; 3: clear amounts of blood). Complications: sore throat ( VAS:10-point scale), dysphonia (yes/no), dysphagia (yes/no).

Interventions

DEVICEi-gel

Evaluation of clinical performance in terms of insertion, ventilation and complications

DEVICEAmbu AuroGain

Evaluation of clinical performance in terms of insertion, ventilation and complications

Sponsors

Dokuz Eylul University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Intervention model description

Prospective, multicenter, randomized

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* ASA classification I-II * Between 18-65 years * Undergoing elective laparoscopic gynecological surgery

Exclusion criteria

1. Those with any neck or upper respiratory tract pathology 2. Those at risk of gastric content regurgitation/aspiration (previous upper GIS surgery, known hiatus hernia, gastroesophageal reflux, history of peptic ulcers, full stomach, pregnancy) 3. Those with low pulmonary compliance or high airway resistance (chronic pulmonary diseases) 4. Obese patients (BMI \>35) 5. Those with throat pain, dysphagia and dysphonia 6. Those with possible or previous difficult airway 7. Those with operations planned for longer than 4 hours 8. Conversion to laparotomy 9. Neuromuscular blocking agent used

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Insertion timeintraoperativeThe time taken to successfully place the device in seconds
Change in airway seal pressureintraoperativeThe maximum oropharyngeal leak pressure attained for each device.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of attempts at insertionintraoperativeThe number of repeated attempts required for successfully placing the device. Each device was given a chance of 3 attempts if still unsuccessful after 3 attempts another device was placed.

Countries

Spain, Turkey (Türkiye)

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026