Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 13, 2026

Laryngeal Mask Airway LMA Placement in a Neonatal Patient Simulator Using a Non-Inflatable Supraglottic Airway SGA
Published on: July 14, 2023
Self-pressurized air-Q® intubating laryngeal airway versus the LMA® Classic™: a randomized clinical trial
Sang Hee Ha1,2, Min-Soo Kim1, Jiwoo Suh1
1Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Anesthesia and Pain Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Purpose:
The self-pressurized air-Q® (air-Q SP) intubating laryngeal airway is a relatively new supraglottic airway (SGA) device. The intracuff pressure of air-Q dynamically equilibrates with the airway pressure and adjusts to the patient's pharyngeal and periglottic anatomy, potentially providing improved airway fit and seal. The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare the clinical performance of air-Q to the LMA® Classic™ SGA.
Methods:
Adult patients requiring general anesthesia for elective surgery were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned to either air-Q SP or the LMA Classic SGA. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (primary endpoint), success rate, insertion features (insertion time, ease of insertion, requirement for device manipulation), sealing function, gastric insufflation, bronchoscopic view, and oropharyngeal complications at device insertion and following its removal (sore throat, dysphagia, dysphonia) were compared.
Results:
The mean (standard deviation [SD]) oropharyngeal leak pressure just after insertion was similar in the air-Q SP and LMA [16.8 (4.9) vs 18.6 (5.5) cm H2O, respectively; mean difference, 1.8 cm H2O; 95% CI, -0.5 to 4.2; P = 0.13] and did not differ at ten minutes following device insertion. Median [interquartile range (IQR)] peak inspiratory pressure just after insertion was lower in the air-Q SP (11.0 [10.0-13.0] vs 13.0 [11.0-14.0] cmH2O, median difference, 1.0 cm H2O; 95% CI, 0.0 to 2.0; P = 0.03) but no difference was observed at ten minutes. The median [IQR] insertion time was faster with the air-Q SP (15.9 [13.6-20.3] sec vs 24 [21.2-27.1] sec; median difference, 8.1 sec; 95% CI, 5.6 to 9.9; P < 0.001) and improved bronchoscopic viewing grade were seen with the air-Q SP immediately after insertion (P < 0.001). No differences between the groups were observed with respect to the rate of successful insertion at first attempt, overall insertion success rate, ease of insertion, and complications.
Conclusions:
The air-Q SP had similar leak pressures but a faster insertion time and superior bronchoscopic viewing grade when compared with the LMA Classic. The air-Q SP is a suitable alternative to the LMA Classic in adult patients and may be a superior conduit for tracheal intubation.
Trial Registration:
www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02206438). Registered 1 August 2014.
More Related Videos
04:30Endotracheal Intubation Using a Flexible Intubation Endoscope as a Standardized Model for Safe Airway Management in Swine
Published on: August 25, 2022
05:43Topical Airway Anesthesia for Awake-endoscopic Intubation Using the Spray-as-you-go Technique with High Oxygen Flow
Published on: January 13, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Statistical Software for Data Analysis and Clinical Trials
Classical Conditioning
Ivan Pavlov observed that dogs...
Trial and Error and Algorithm
Random Error