Supraglottic airway devices in short gynecological procedures: A randomized, clinical study comparing the Baska® mask and I-Gel® device

• Main Authors: Anurag Garg, N S Lamba, N S. Ajai Chandra, R K Singhal, Vishal Chaudhary
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2019-01-01
• Series: Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care
• Subjects: Anesthesia; Baska mask ®; I-Gel device; supraglottic airway devices
• Online Access: http://www.jfmpc.com/article.asp?issn=2249-4863;year=2019;volume=8;issue=3;spage=1134;epage=1137;aulast=Garg

Background: Supraglottic airway devices are used for anesthesia in elective surgical procedures circumventing the need for intubation. We investigated the efficacy and safety of Baska® mask in comparison to an I-Gel® device. Methods: In this cross-sectional, observational study, we randomized 100 female patients (age 18–45 years, American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade I or II) undergoing elective short gynecological procedures into two groups, to receive ventilation with either Baska mask® (group 1, n = 50) or an I-Gel® device (group 2, n = 50). We excluded patients with obesity, short neck, and known systemic and upper airway disorders. The primary outcome was the oropharyngeal airway seal pressure, and the secondary outcomes were the ease of insertion and the complication rate. The results were analyzed using Mann–Whitney U-test and Fisher's exact test, and correlation analysis was done by Spearman's correlation test. Results: A total of 56 patients underwent dilatation and curettage, whereas the remaining had hysteroscopy in the study. The airway seal pressure achieved was higher with Baska® mask than I-Gel® device (35.8 ± 10.3 and 26.9 ± 7.5 of cm H2O, respectively; P < 0.0001). The ease of insertion (P < 0.0001) was better in group 1 and the complication rates were similar in both the groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Baska® mask offers a superior airway seal pressure with minimum complications in comparison to an I-Gel® device. Further studies with a large number of patients in different surgical settings are required to confirm our findings.