A Comparison of the Ambu AuraGain Versus LMA Supreme in Children
A Randomized Comparison of the Ambu AuraGain™ and LMA Supreme™ in Infants and Children
1 other identifier
interventional
100
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The purpose of this study is to determine whether there is a clinically relevant difference in airway leak pressures between the Ambu AuraGain and the Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) Supreme.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable
Started Mar 2015
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
February 26, 2015
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
March 1, 2015
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
March 5, 2015
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
June 1, 2015
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
June 1, 2015
CompletedJuly 20, 2015
July 1, 2015
3 months
February 26, 2015
July 17, 2015
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (2)
Oropharyngeal (airway) leak pressure - Initial
The airway pressure at which an airway leak is observed after successful placement of the supraglottic airway
Assessed intraoperatively at the time of confirmed device placement
Oropharyngeal (airway) leak pressure - 10 Minutes
The airway pressure at which an airway leak is observed 10 minutes after successful placement of the supraglottic airway
Assessed intraoperatively, 10 minutes after the initial confirmed placement of the device
Secondary Outcomes (8)
Time for Successful Placement of the Supraglottic Airway
Assessed intraoperatively at the time of confirmed device placement
Number of attempts to placement of Supraglottic Airway
Assessed intraoperatively at the time of confirmed device placement
Fiberoptic Grade of Laryngeal View through Supraglottic Airway
Assessed intraoperatively at the time of confirmed device placement
Gastric Tube Insertion Ease of Placement
Assessed intraoperatively at the time of confirmed gastric tube placement
Gastric Tube Insertion Time
Assessed intraoperatively at the time of confirmed gastric tube placement
- +3 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
Ambu AuraGain
EXPERIMENTALSubjects will receive the Ambu AuraGain size 1.5 or 2.0 based on manufacturer guidelines
LMA Supreme
ACTIVE COMPARATORSubjects will receive the Ambu AuraGain size 1.5 or 2.0 based on manufacturer guidelines
Interventions
The device will be inserted and timed. A leak pressure test will be performed after successful insertion and after 10 minutes. The larynx will be visualized by placing a fiberoptic bronchoscope through the device. A gastric tube will be inserted through the device and timed.
The device will be inserted and timed. A leak pressure test will be performed after successful insertion and after 10 minutes. The larynx will be visualized by placing a fiberoptic bronchoscope through the device. A gastric tube will be inserted through the device and timed.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Scheduled for surgery utilizing a supraglottic airway device
- ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) I-III classification
- Weighing between 5 - 20 kilograms
You may not qualify if:
- Active respiratory infection
- History of difficult mask ventilation
- Diagnosis of congenital syndrome with difficult airway management
- Active gastrointestinal reflux
- Coagulopathy
- Significant Pulmonary disease
- Emergent surgery
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Ann & Robert H Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois, 60611, United States
Related Publications (4)
White MC, Cook TM, Stoddart PA. A critique of elective pediatric supraglottic airway devices. Paediatr Anaesth. 2009 Jul;19 Suppl 1:55-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2009.02997.x.
PMID: 19572845BACKGROUNDJagannathan N, Ramsey MA, White MC, Sohn L. An update on newer pediatric supraglottic airways with recommendations for clinical use. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015 Apr;25(4):334-45. doi: 10.1111/pan.12614. Epub 2015 Jan 13.
PMID: 25585975BACKGROUNDJagannathan N, Sohn LE, Sawardekar A, Gordon J, Langen KE, Anderson K. A randomised comparison of the LMA SupremeTM and LMAProSealTM in children. Anaesthesia. 2012 Jun;67(6):632-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2012.07088.x. Epub 2012 Mar 15.
PMID: 22420717BACKGROUNDJagannathan N, Sohn L, Sommers K, Belvis D, Shah RD, Sawardekar A, Eidem J, Dagraca J, Mukherji I. A randomized comparison of the laryngeal mask airway supreme and laryngeal mask airway unique in infants and children: does cuff pressure influence leak pressure? Paediatr Anaesth. 2013 Oct;23(10):927-33. doi: 10.1111/pan.12145. Epub 2013 Mar 23.
PMID: 23521105BACKGROUND
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Narasimhan Jagannathan, M.D.
Ann & Robert H Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Primary Investigator; M.D.
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
February 26, 2015
First Posted
March 5, 2015
Study Start
March 1, 2015
Primary Completion
June 1, 2015
Study Completion
June 1, 2015
Last Updated
July 20, 2015
Record last verified: 2015-07