Comparison of clinical performance between Ambu Aura Gain™ and I-gel® inserted by trainee anesthesia residents: A prospective randomized control study

Background and Aims: Early training with supraglottic airway devices (SGAD) are imperative for training. This study was done to assess the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) when 1 st year anaesthesia residents inserted Ambu Aura Gain™ and I-gel ® devices. Materials and Methods: A prospective randomized observational study was conducted on 200 1 st year anesthesia residents for SGAD insertion. The trainees were randomly allocated into groups (Group A: Ambu Aura Gain™ and Group I: I-gel ® ). The OLP was compared in each group along the first attempt success rate, total insertion attempt, insertion time, ease of SGAD insertion, ease of gastric tube insertion, fiberoptic view, and complications associated with Inflatable SGAD aura gain and noninflatable SGAD. Results: The mean OLP was 29.31 ± 5.93 and 30.03 ± 4.84 cmH 2 O for I-gel ® and Ambu Aura Gain™, respectively ( P = 0.348). The first attempt success rate was 96% for I-gel ® and 89% for Ambu Aura Gain™ ( P = 0.06). Effective device insertion time was 28.76 ± 7.74 s for I-gel ® and 38.42 ± 8.05 s for Ambu Aura Gain™ ( P < 0.001). In Group A 7%, 49%, 36%, and 8% of patients had 4, 3, 2, and 1 fiberoptic scores, respectively, and 9%, 54%, 32%, and 5% of patients in Group I had scores of 4, 3, 2, and 1, respectively. Conclusion: I-gel ® is better in terms of quicker insertion by anesthesia trainees than the Ambu Aura Gain™.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Indian Anaesthetists Forum
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4103/theiaforum.theiaforum_32_25
Primary Topic
Airway Management and Intubation Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of clinical performance between Ambu Aura Gain™ and I-gel® inserted by trainee anesthesia residents: A prospective randomized control study

Prabhakar Mishra, Tapas Kumar Singh, Divya Srivastava, Amit Rastogi et al.
The Indian Anaesthetists Forum
Airway Management and Intubation Techniques
article

Comparison of clinical performance between Ambu Aura Gain™ and I-gel® inserted by trainee anesthesia residents: A prospective randomized control study

Prabhakar Mishra, Tapas Kumar Singh, Divya Srivastava, Amit Rastogi, Esther Owk, Chetna Shamsherry
article en

Abstract

Background and Aims: Early training with supraglottic airway devices (SGAD) are imperative for training. This study was done to assess the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) when 1 st year anaesthesia residents inserted Ambu Aura Gain™ and I-gel ® devices. Materials and Methods: A prospective randomized observational study was conducted on 200 1 st year anesthesia residents for SGAD insertion. The trainees were randomly allocated into groups (Group A: Ambu Aura Gain™ and Group I: I-gel ® ). The OLP was compared in each group along the first attempt success rate, total insertion attempt, insertion time, ease of SGAD insertion, ease of gastric tube insertion, fiberoptic view, and complications associated with Inflatable SGAD aura gain and noninflatable SGAD. Results: The mean OLP was 29.31 ± 5.93 and 30.03 ± 4.84 cmH 2 O for I-gel ® and Ambu Aura Gain™, respectively ( P = 0.348). The first attempt success rate was 96% for I-gel ® and 89% for Ambu Aura Gain™ ( P = 0.06). Effective device insertion time was 28.76 ± 7.74 s for I-gel ® and 38.42 ± 8.05 s for Ambu Aura Gain™ ( P < 0.001). In Group A 7%, 49%, 36%, and 8% of patients had 4, 3, 2, and 1 fiberoptic scores, respectively, and 9%, 54%, 32%, and 5% of patients in Group I had scores of 4, 3, 2, and 1, respectively. Conclusion: I-gel ® is better in terms of quicker insertion by anesthesia trainees than the Ambu Aura Gain™.

The Indian Anaesthetists ForumVol. 26(1)
Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 73%
Airway Management and Intubation Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.