This randomized study compares insertion success and oropharyngeal seal pressure in two supraglottic airway devices, indicating LMA BlockBuster may perform better.
Background And Aims: Supraglottic airway devices are pivotal in modern airway management. While endotracheal intubation remain the gold standard, it carries risks of complications including trauma and haemodynamic instability. Supraglottic airway devices like Ambu AuraGain (single-use) and LMA BlockBuster (reusable) offer less invasive alternatives with advanced features, though comparative data remain limited. This study compared Ambu AuraGain and LMA BlockBuster in terms of oropharyngeal seal pressure (OSP), insertion efficacy, and complications. Methods: This randomized study compared 90 ASA I-II patients (18-65 years) receiving either device during elective surgery. Standardized anesthesia included propofol, fentanyl, and vecuronium. Primary outcomes assessed insertion success, time to placement, and oropharyngeal seal pressure (OSP). Secondary outcomes evaluated haemodynamics and complications. Data were analysed using Student's t-test and Chi-square test, with p value 0.05 deemed statistically significant. LMA BlockBuster demonstrated superior performance Results: with 100% first-attempt success versus 88.9% for AuraGain (p=0.066). It achieved higher OSP (29.9 vs 22.7 cm H₂O, p value 0.001) and faster placement (12.3±2.2 vs 17.6±2.0 sec, p value 0.001). Ease of insertion favored BlockBuster (84.4% vs 77.8% effortless). Haemodynamic stability was comparable between groups. AuraGain showed higher rates of sore throat (13.3% vs 4.4%), displacement (6.7% vs 0%), and blood staining (4.4% vs 0%), though not statistically significant. LMA BlockBuster demonstrated advantages in insertion success, airway seali Conclusion: ng, and speed of placement while maintaining haemodynamic stability. Both devices were clinically effective, with BlockBuster potentially offering superior performance characteristics for routine and challenging airway management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Garg† et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: