Comparison of the Air-Q®sp versus the LMA® Supreme™ in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery: a single-blind, randomized controlled trial

Previous studies have reported the clinical utility of the LMA® Supreme™ (LMA Supreme) in laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia, but there has been limited research on the effectiveness of the self-pressurized Air-Q® (Air-Q) in this clinical context. This study assessed the clinical performance of the Air-Q in laparoscopic gynecological surgeries by comparing its effectiveness, particularly in terms of oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), against that of the LMA Supreme. Fifty-two female patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists class I–II) scheduled for laparoscopic gynecologic surgery were randomly assigned to either the Air-Q group or the LMA Supreme group. The primary outcome was OLP, and secondary outcomes included the number of attempts required for device insertion, the time taken for insertion, difficulty of insertion, leakage rate, and complications associated with supraglottic airway device use. The Air-Q group exhibited a significantly lower OLP compared to the LMA Supreme group (19.5 ± 4.1 cmH2O vs. 23.2 ± 6.0 cmH2O, p = 0.011), with a mean difference of −3.8 cmH2O (95% confidence interval, −6.6 to −0.9 cmH2O). Analysis of secondary outcomes revealed no significant differences between the two groups. LMA Supreme could be preferred over Air-Q for airway management during general anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery primarily due to its higher OLP. However, the Air-Q remains a viable alternative, exhibiting no significant differences in leakage rates compared to LMA Supreme.

Supraglottic airway device; Laryngeal mask airway; Airway management; General anesthesia; Laparoscopic surgery; Gynecologic surgery

[1] Karaaslan E, Akbas S, Ozkan AS, Colak C, Begec Z. A comparison of laryngeal mask airway-supreme and endotracheal tube use with respect to airway protection in patients undergoing septoplasty: a randomized, single-blind, controlled clinical trial. BMC Anesthesiology. 2021; 21: 5.

[2] Pang N, Pan F, Chen R, Zhang B, Yang Z, Guo M, et al. Laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal intubation as general anesthesia airway managements for atrial fibrillation catheter ablation: a comparative analysis based on propensity score matching. To be published in Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology. 2024. [Preprint].

[3] Dong W, Zhang W, Er J, Liu J, Han J. Comparison of laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal tube in general anesthesia in children. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine. 2023; 26: 554.

[4] Yang LQ, Zhu L, Shi X, Miao CH, Yuan HB, et al. Postoperative pulmonary complications in older patients undergoing elective surgery with a supraglottic airway device or tracheal intubation. Anaesthesia. 2023; 78: 953–962.

[5] Akimaru S, Nakanishi T, Hasegawa T, Sobue K. Anesthetic management of inguinal hernia surgery using a second-generation supraglottic airway in a patient with trisomy 18: a case report. Cureus. 2023; 15: e45337.

[6] Gong Y, Xu X, Wang J, Che L, Wang W, Yi J. Laryngeal mask airway reduces incidence of post-operative sore throat after thyroid surgery compared with endotracheal tube: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. BMC Anesthesiology. 2020; 20: 16.

[7] Abdi W, Amathieu R, Adhoum A, Poncelet C, Slavov V, Kamoun W, et al. Sparing the larynx during gynecological laparoscopy: a randomized trial comparing the LMA Supreme and the ETT. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. 2010; 54: 141–146.

[8] Seet E, Rajeev S, Firoz T, Yousaf F, Wong J, Wong DT, et al. Safety and efficacy of laryngeal mask airway Supreme versus laryngeal mask airway ProSeal: a randomized controlled trial. European Journal of Anaesthesiology. 2010; 27: 602–607.

[9] Segond N, Bellier A, Duhem H, Sanchez C, Busi O, Deutsch S, et al. Supraglottic airway device to improve ventilation success and reduce pulmonary aspiration during cardio-pulmonary resuscitation by basic life support rescuers: a randomized cross-over human cadaver study. Prehospital Emergency Care. 2023; 27: 695–703.

[10] Forestell B, Ramsden S, Sharif S, Centofanti J, Al Lawati K, Fernando SM, et al. Supraglottic airway versus tracheal intubation for airway management in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials. Critical Care Medicine. 2024; 52: e89–e99.

[11] Andresen ÅEL, Varild Lauritzen M, Kramer-Johansen J, Kristiansen T. Implementation and use of a supraglottic airway device in the management of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest by firefighter first responders—a prospective feasibility study. Resuscitation Plus. 2023; 16: 100480.

[12] Hofmeyr R, Lubbe D. How we do it: endoscopic tracheal dilatation technique using a supraglottic airway device and non-occlusive balloon. The Journal of Laryngology & Otology. 2023; 137: 219–221.

[13] Warren J, Wilhelm K, Gupta P, Kazan C. Use of i-Gel supraglottic airway in a simulated cardiac arrest resuscitation during boat rescue transport by Los Angeles County fire lifeguard division: a proof-of-concept study. Air Medical Journal. 2024; 43: 34–36.

[14] Cavallin F, Brombin L, Turati M, Sparaventi C, Doglioni N, Villani PE, et al. Laryngeal mask airway in neonatal stabilization and transport: a retrospective study. European Journal of Pediatrics. 2023; 182: 4069–4075.

[15] Keller C, Brimacombe J, Bittersohl J, Lirk P, von Goedecke A. Aspiration and the laryngeal mask airway: three cases and a review of the literature. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2004; 93: 579–582.

[16] Beleña JM, Ochoa EJ, Núñez M, Gilsanz C, Vidal A. Role of laryngeal mask airway in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery. 2015; 7: 319–325.

[17] van Zundert AAJ, Gatt SP, van Zundert TCRV, Hagberg CA, Pandit JJ. Supraglottic airway devices: present state and outlook for 2050. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 2024; 138: 337–349.

[18] Chen X, Jiao J, Cong X, Liu L, Wu X. A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLOS ONE. 2013; 8: e71910.

[19] Teoh WH, Lee KM, Suhitharan T, Yahaya Z, Teo MM, Sia ATH. Comparison of the LMA Supreme vs the i-gel™ in paralysed patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery with controlled ventilation. Anaesthesia. 2010; 65: 1173–1179.

[20] Park SY, Rim JC, Kim H, Lee JH, Chung CJ. Comparison of i-gel® and LMA Supreme® during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology. 2015; 68: 455–461.

[21] Galgon RE, Schroeder KM, Han S, Andrei A, Joffe AM. The air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway vs the LMA-ProSealTM: a prospective, randomised trial of airway seal pressure. Anaesthesia. 2011; 66: 1093–1100.

[22] Ahn EJ, Choi GJ, Kang H, Baek CW, Jung YH, Woo YC, et al. Comparative efficacy of the Air-Q intubating laryngeal airway during general anesthesia in pediatric patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BioMed Research International. 2016; 2016: 6406391.

[23] Seet E, Yousaf F, Gupta S, Subramanyam R, Wong D, Chung F. Use of manometry for laryngeal mask airway reduces postoperative pharyngolaryngeal adverse events. Anesthesiology. 2010; 112: 652–657.

[24] Bae GE, Shin HW, Lim HH, Ju BJ, Jang YK. Predicting the optimal minimal cuff volume of the laryngeal mask airway from physical examination parameters. Anesthesia and Pain Medicine. 2017; 12: 381–387.

[25] Keller C, Brimacombe JR, Keller K, Morris R. Comparison of four methods for assessing airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in adult patients. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 1999; 82: 286–287.

[26] Wallin M, Hedenstierna G. Tidal volumes: cold and dry or warm and humid, does it matter? Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing. 2020; 34: 871–873.

[27] Zhang L, Seet E, Mehta V, Subramanyam R, Ankichetty SP, Wong DT, et al. Oropharyngeal leak pressure with the laryngeal mask airway Supreme™ at different intracuff pressures: a randomized controlled trial. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia. 2011; 58: 624–629.

[28] Sotis CL, Jafari H, Solano JJ, Fishman I. Transient hypoglossal and lingual nerve injury following the use of I-gel supraglottic airway: a case report. Cureus. 2023; 15: e47509.

[29] Ha SH, Kim M, Suh J, Lee JS. Self-pressurized air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway versus the LMA® Classic™: a randomized clinical trial. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia. 2018; 65: 543–550.

[30] Lee JS, Kim D, Choi SH, Ha SH, Kim S, Kim M. Prospective, randomized comparison of the I-gel and the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway in elderly anesthetized patients. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 2020; 130: 480–487.

[31] Sun Y, Zhang M, Gao X, Gao Z, Zou T, Guo Y, et al. Effect of the new video laryngeal mask airway SaCoVLM on airway management in lateral laparoscopic urological surgery: a single center randomized controlled trial. Scientific Reports. 2024; 14: 2132.

[32] Bandyopadhyay A, Puri S, Ashok V. Supraglottic airway device versus tracheal tube for pediatric laparoscopic surgery—a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Pediatric Anesthesia. 2023; 33: 905–912.

[33] Bidaye S, Sommerville A, Straker T. When is it safe to use a supraglottic airway device? Advanced uses for SGA devices. Current Anesthesiology Reports. 2023; 13: 13–21.

[34] Lee JE, Kim HY, Lee KW, Kim GS. Second-generation supraglottic airway in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Scientific Reports. 2023; 13: 8406.

[35] Hartsuyker P, Kanczuk ME, Lawn D, Beg S, Mengistu TS, Hiskens M. The effect of clafss 3 obesity on the functionality of supraglottic airway devices: a historical cohort analysis with propensity score matching. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia. 2023; 70: 1744–1752.