Intubation through 2 supraglottic airway device in cervical spine immobilization: a randomized trial of residents’ use of the intubating laryngeal mask airway and the intubating laryngeal tube in manikins

Objectives.

The aim of this study was to compare the intubating laryngeal mask (iLM) airway and the new intubating laryngeal tube (iLTS-D) in use by residents with minimal previous intubation experience during simulated conditions of reduced cervical spine mobility.

Methods.

Thirty first-year residents in anesthesiology participated in the study (18 women). All participants had minimal intubation experience (fewer than 10 previously performed intubations) and were novices in the specialty. Both devices were used by each participant after random assignment of order. We recorded the time required to insert the

device and start to ventilate through it (T1) and the time from insertion and intubation to successful ventilation (T2). Efficacy of intubation and each resident’s assessment of ease of use were also assessed.

Results.

The residents’ mean (SD) T1 values were similar for the 2 devices (iLMA, 15.3 [5.5] seconds; iLTS-D, 15.4 [5.5] seconds; P=.938). T2 was shorter with the iLTS-D (25.4 [8.6] seconds vs 31.9 [8.8] seconds with the iLMA; P=.005). There were no failed intubation attempts with the iLTS-D.

Conclusions.

The new iLTS-D may be a good alternative to the iLMA because a patient can be intubated and successfully ventilated in less time. The rate of successful intubation is also better with the iLTS-D.