A Prospective Randomized Comparative Study Between The Self-Pressurized Air-Q With Blocker And Air-Q Blocker In Female Patients Undergoing Minor Gynaecological Procedures

Background: Supraglottic Airway Devices (SAD) have become valuable for both routine and difficult airway management, Air-q is an intubating laryngeal airway allowing passage of conventional endotracheal tubes (up to 7.5and 8.5-mm IDs for Air-Q sizes 3.5 and 4.5, respectively). Methods: This randomized comparative study was conducted in obstetrics and gynecology department, Kasr Al-Ainy hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Egypt. Patients were allocated into 2 equal groups of 30 patients each. Random allocation numbers were concealed in opaque closed envelops. Patients were allocated as follows • GSPB (n=30): size 3.5 or 4.5 AIR Q SP with blocker was selected and used as a ventilating SGD according to manufacturer’s recommendations. • GB (n=30): size 3.5 or 4.5 AIR Q blocker was selected and used as a ventilating SGD according to manufacturer’s recommendations. Proper positioning was confirmed by inspection of chest inflation bilaterally, auscultation of the chest bilaterally, auscultation of the neck for abnormal respiratory sounds, absence of any leak sounds from the device and a successive stable square-waves in capnogram trace. Results: In this study 60 patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups of 30 each. There was no statistically significant difference regarding mean age, mean body weight and El-Ganzouri score between the studied groups. While studying the Airway Seal Pressure (primary outcome) at different time intervals did not show significant difference between the 2 study groups. Furthermore, there was statistically significant decrease in GSPB when compared to GB throughout all time intervals (p < 0.001). In both groups mean blood pressure decreased while mean heart rate increased after induction with no statistical significance between the two groups. Only 3.3% in each group showed postoperative complications in the form of bloody mucus and was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Air Q MLA with blocker offered a better airway sealing pressure than air Q MLA SP with blocker together with shorted insertion time.