Airway ManagementNCT02644837
AuraGain and iGel Crossover Comparison
A study testing Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel, Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope and Ability to insert nasogastric tube in people with Airway Management and Laryngeal Mask Airway, run by NHS Tayside at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
This study will look at key performance indicators of 2 supraglottic airway devices in anaesthetised adults in a crossover manner. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Airway Management, Laryngeal Mask Airway
- What is being tested?
- Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel, Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope and Ability to insert nasogastric tube
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 2 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- Oct 2016to Aug 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- patients who have read and understood patient information leaflets about the study and undergo informed consent.
- patients whose anaesthesia management is being carried out by one of the named investigators
- adult (age >18 years) patients undergoing general anaesthesia
- American Society of Anaesthesiology Grading (ASA) 1-3
- suitability for general anaesthesia using a laryngeal mask airway device
Who cannot join
- the presence of significant acute or chronic lung disease
- pathology of neck or upper respiratory tract
- an identified or anticipated difficult intubation
- an increased risk of aspiration (hiatus hernia, gastro-oesophageal reflux or full stomach etc.) pregnant women
- a body mass index greater than 35kg.m-2
- patients unable to communicate fully in English.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Randomised Crossover Comparison of the Ambu AuraGain and the iGel in Anaesthetised Adults
This study will look at key performance indicators of 2 supraglottic airway devices in anaesthetised adults in a crossover manner.
Read the detailed description
A supraglottic airway device (SAD), also referred to as laryngeal mask airway (LMA), is a medical device that maintains a patients airway, allowing unobstructed ventilation during anaesthesia. They are designed to sit in the patient's hypopharynx (throat), with their elliptical head forming a seal around the supraglottic structures (the patients "voice box"). They have been in common use since 1989, transforming anaesthetic practice and are now the predominant airway device within anaesthesia, being used in approximately 56% of all general anaesthetic cases in the UK(1). Their popularity for routine use stems from its perceived benefits over traditional forms of airway management coupled with their high overall success rate and low complication rate.
SADs, in anaesthetic practice, are inserted after induction of general anaesthesia, by or under supervision of, a trained medical professional. All patients are fully monitored as set out by the Association of Anaesthetist of Great Britain and Ireland; Recommendations for standards of monitoring during anaesthesia and recovery (2). Devices are used in concordance with manufacturer instruction. Successful first time placement is achieved in a large majority of patients and allows provision of oxygen and ventilation. In some patients, one device or size of device may present sub-optimal performance resulting in the removal of the device. Further actions in this scenario would include attempting a second insertion of the same device, attempting an insertion with an alternative size of the same device or a further attempt with an alterative design of device in order to achieve a patent airway. Further attempts may be taken but should be limited to avoid unnecessary trauma. In some cases the use of the SAD is abandoned and the patient is intubated with an endotracheal tube in order to provide a safe secure airway.
Alternatives to use of a SAD for airway management include use of a simple facemask or tracheal intubation with an endotracheal tube. Advantages of using a SAD for anaesthetic airway management compared to a facemask are improved oxygen saturation and less operator/anaesthetist fatigue. Compared to an endotracheal tube the advantages of using a SAD are improved haemodynamic stability at induction and emergence from anaesthesia, reduced anaesthetic requirements, improved quality of emergence, lower incidence of sore throat, increased ease of placement and reduced risk of dental damage. Risks of using an LMA compared to an endotracheal tube are increased gastric insufflation and aspiration with these being more common in patients who are poorly selected for anaesthesia with a SAD. Sore throat is the most common complication with a study
There have been significant developments in design in the SAD market in recent years with development of a "second generation" range of devices involving new materials and designs that integrate protective bite blocks, gastric drainage channels and improved supraglottic seal enhancing patient safety when using these devices. There are now some new "third generation" SADs on the market with designs that may enhance anaesthetic practice and improve patient safety further.
This study will follow similar ethically approved protocols used in published studies comparing airway equipment (3,4). These are only 2 examples but there are hundreds of LMA studies throughout the literature. The Ambu AuraGain is a new device and has not been studied fully. Comparative studies frequently assess oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), a fibre optic assessment of glottic alignment, ease of insertion, ability to insert a nasogastric tube down the gastric port and frequency of manipulations.
We propose a crossover design to better detect differences between the two devices as this eliminates confounding differences in patient characteristics and demographics.
There have been significant developments in design in the SAD market in recent years with
Our proposal would be to carry out a randomised crossover comparison between a new "third generation" SAD; the AuraGainTM (Ambu, Copenhagen, Denmark) and our current "second generation" SAD; the i-gel (Intersurgical Ltd, Wokingham, UK) to examine and compare key performance indicators with their use.
The AuraGain is a new device on the market and has not been compared to other devices yet.
- Conditions
- Airway Management, Laryngeal Mask Airway
- Being tested
- Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel, Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope, Ability to insert nasogastric tube, Measurement of OLP, Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and IgelDevice
Insertion of Ambu AuraGain and iGel laryngeal mask airways in accordance with manufacturer instruction
Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scopeDevice
Passage of Ambu a-scope fibrescope down shaft of laryngeal mask airway and assessment of alignment with glottis in relation to amount of glottis that is easily visualised
Ability to insert nasogastric tubeDevice
Passage of nasogastric tube down the gastric drainage channel of the device in accordance with manufacturer guidance
Measurement of OLPDevice
Measurement of OLP by closing the adjustable pressure limiting valve against a constant fresh gas flow rate of 3 litres/minute
Ability to perform positive pressure ventilationDevice
The ability to deliver 6 mls/kg volumes breaths by means of positive pressure ventilation will be assessed
Assessment of ease of insertionDevice
Ease of insertion will be subjectively assessed by operator in relation to presence and nature of resistance to insertion of the device
Record number of manipulationsDevice
The number of manipulations/adjustments will be recorded for the second device only for the remainder of the device use during surgery until the patient wakes.
Assessment of device related traumaDevice
Observation and assessment of any trauma caused by the insertion of the first device used
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| i-Gel and AuraGain | Active comparator | In this arm of the crossover study, patients will undergo insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and iGel and will undergo initial management with the iGel. Primary and Secondary outcomes will be assessed. The initial device will be removed and subsequent Airway management will then be undertaken with the Ambu AuraGain and the same outcomes will be assessed.
Interventions with both devices will be
1. Insertion of the laryngeal mask airway
2. Assessment of ease of insertion
3. Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation
4. Measurement of OLP
5. Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope
6. Ability to insert nasogastric tube
7. Record number of manipulations
8. An assessment of device related trauma Receives: Device: Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel; Device: Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope; Device: Ability to insert nasogastric tube; Device: Measurement of OLP; Device: Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation; Device: Assessment of ease of insertion; Device: Record number of manipulations; Device: Assessment of device related trauma |
| AuraGain and i-Gel | Active comparator | In this arm of the crossover study, patients will undergo insertion of the Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and i-Gel and will undergo initial management with the Ambu AuraGain.. Primary and Secondary outcomes will be assessed. Airway management will then be undertaken with the iGel device and the same outcomes will be assessed.
Interventions with both devices will be
1. Insertion of the laryngeal mask airway
2. Assessment of ease of insertion
3. Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation
4. Measurement of OLP
5. Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope
6. Ability to insert nasogastric tube
7. Record number of manipulations
8. An assessment of device related trauma Receives: Device: Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel; Device: Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope; Device: Ability to insert nasogastric tube; Device: Measurement of OLP; Device: Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation; Device: Assessment of ease of insertion; Device: Record number of manipulations; Device: Assessment of device related trauma |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
oropharyngeal leak pressure
If successful ventilation is achieved with the device, the investigator will measure OLP by closing the Adjustable Pressure Limiting valve on the anaesthetic machine; with a fresh gas flow of 3l/min. Pressure at which equilibrium is reached will be deemed the OLP. Pressure will not be allowed to exceed 40cmH20.
Measured: Up to 3 minutes of successful insertion of each device
Secondary outcomes (7)
Ease of insertion
Subjective assessment of ease of insertion of device
Measured: Up to 1 minute on each insertion attempt
Number of attempts required to insert
Record of number of attempts required to insert successfully
Measured: Up to 1 minute of completion of total insertion attempts
Evidence of Airway Trauma
Examination of device for signs of airway trauma produced during insertion of first device
Measured: Up to 1 minute after removal of first device used
Adequacy of positive pressure ventilation
- Adequacy of ventilation as assessed by the presence of square wave capnography indicative of unobstructed ventilation and the ability to provide chest wall movement that approximates to the patients normal tidal volume
Measured: Up to 1 minute after successful insertion of device and after completion of outcome 4 measurement
Fibreoptic assessment of device position
A fibreoptic scope will be inserted down the shaft of each device, whilst ventilation continues and a subjective assessment of alignment with glottic structures is made.
Measured: Up to 5 minutes after successful insertion and after completion of outcome 5 measurement
Ability to insert nasogastric tube down gastric channel of device
Measured: Up to 5 minutes after successful insertion and after completion of outcome 6 measurement
Intraoperative manipulations required
Intraoperative manipulations during procedure recorded for second device only
Measured: For up to 2 hours after induction of anaesthesia
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Jan 2016 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2016
- Primary completionMay 2017
- Study completionAug 2017
Why it stopped: Unsuccessful attempts to recruit participants
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Airway ManagementStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 2 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- NHS Tayside
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Simon M Crawley, MBChB FRCA, Principal investigator, Consultant Anaesthetist
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02644837
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2015AN07
- Status last verified
- Dec 2017
- First submitted
- 4 Dec 2015
- Last updated
- 26 Dec 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Dec 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Randomised Crossover Comparison of the Ambu AuraGain and the iGel in Anaesthetised Adults
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02644837
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2015AN07
- Conditions
- Airway Management, Laryngeal Mask Airway
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- TerminatedReason stopped: Unsuccessful attempts to recruit participants
- Enrolment
- 2 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- NHS TaysideOther government
- Study start
- Oct 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- May 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 1 Jan 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study will look at key performance indicators of 2 supraglottic airway devices in anaesthetised adults in a crossover manner.
Detailed description
A supraglottic airway device (SAD), also referred to as laryngeal mask airway (LMA), is a medical device that maintains a patients airway, allowing unobstructed ventilation during anaesthesia. They are designed to sit in the patient's hypopharynx (throat), with their elliptical head forming a seal around the supraglottic structures (the patients "voice box"). They have been in common use since 1989, transforming anaesthetic practice and are now the predominant airway device within anaesthesia, being used in approximately 56% of all general anaesthetic cases in the UK(1). Their popularity for routine use stems from its perceived benefits over traditional forms of airway management coupled with their high overall success rate and low complication rate.
SADs, in anaesthetic practice, are inserted after induction of general anaesthesia, by or under supervision of, a trained medical professional. All patients are fully monitored as set out by the Association of Anaesthetist of Great Britain and Ireland; Recommendations for standards of monitoring during anaesthesia and recovery (2). Devices are used in concordance with manufacturer instruction. Successful first time placement is achieved in a large majority of patients and allows provision of oxygen and ventilation. In some patients, one device or size of device may present sub-optimal performance resulting in the removal of the device. Further actions in this scenario would include attempting a second insertion of the same device, attempting an insertion with an alternative size of the same device or a further attempt with an alterative design of device in order to achieve a patent airway. Further attempts may be taken but should be limited to avoid unnecessary trauma. In some cases the use of the SAD is abandoned and the patient is intubated with an endotracheal tube in order to provide a safe secure airway.
Alternatives to use of a SAD for airway management include use of a simple facemask or tracheal intubation with an endotracheal tube. Advantages of using a SAD for anaesthetic airway management compared to a facemask are improved oxygen saturation and less operator/anaesthetist fatigue. Compared to an endotracheal tube the advantages of using a SAD are improved haemodynamic stability at induction and emergence from anaesthesia, reduced anaesthetic requirements, improved quality of emergence, lower incidence of sore throat, increased ease of placement and reduced risk of dental damage. Risks of using an LMA compared to an endotracheal tube are increased gastric insufflation and aspiration with these being more common in patients who are poorly selected for anaesthesia with a SAD. Sore throat is the most common complication with a study
There have been significant developments in design in the SAD market in recent years with development of a "second generation" range of devices involving new materials and designs that integrate protective bite blocks, gastric drainage channels and improved supraglottic seal enhancing patient safety when using these devices. There are now some new "third generation" SADs on the market with designs that may enhance anaesthetic practice and improve patient safety further.
This study will follow similar ethically approved protocols used in published studies comparing airway equipment (3,4). These are only 2 examples but there are hundreds of LMA studies throughout the literature. The Ambu AuraGain is a new device and has not been studied fully. Comparative studies frequently assess oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP), a fibre optic assessment of glottic alignment, ease of insertion, ability to insert a nasogastric tube down the gastric port and frequency of manipulations.
We propose a crossover design to better detect differences between the two devices as this eliminates confounding differences in patient characteristics and demographics.
There have been significant developments in design in the SAD market in recent years with
Our proposal would be to carry out a randomised crossover comparison between a new "third generation" SAD; the AuraGainTM (Ambu, Copenhagen, Denmark) and our current "second generation" SAD; the i-gel (Intersurgical Ltd, Wokingham, UK) to examine and compare key performance indicators with their use.
The AuraGain is a new device on the market and has not been compared to other devices yet.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| i-Gel and AuraGain | Active comparator | Device: Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel, Device: Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope, Device: Ability to insert nasogastric tube, Device: Measurement of OLP, Device: Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation, Device: Assessment of ease of insertion, Device: Record number of manipulations, Device: Assessment of device related traumaIn this arm of the crossover study, patients will undergo insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and iGel and will undergo initial management with the iGel. Primary and Secondary outcomes will be assessed. The initial device will be removed and subsequent Airway management will then be undertaken with the Ambu AuraGain and the same outcomes will be assessed. Interventions with both devices will be 1. Insertion of the laryngeal mask airway 2. Assessment of ease of insertion 3. Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation 4. Measurement of OLP 5. Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope 6. Ability to insert nasogastric tube 7. Record number of manipulations 8. An assessment of device related trauma |
| AuraGain and i-Gel | Active comparator | Device: Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel, Device: Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope, Device: Ability to insert nasogastric tube, Device: Measurement of OLP, Device: Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation, Device: Assessment of ease of insertion, Device: Record number of manipulations, Device: Assessment of device related traumaIn this arm of the crossover study, patients will undergo insertion of the Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and i-Gel and will undergo initial management with the Ambu AuraGain.. Primary and Secondary outcomes will be assessed. Airway management will then be undertaken with the iGel device and the same outcomes will be assessed. Interventions with both devices will be 1. Insertion of the laryngeal mask airway 2. Assessment of ease of insertion 3. Ability to perform positive pressure ventilation 4. Measurement of OLP 5. Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope 6. Ability to insert nasogastric tube 7. Record number of manipulations 8. An assessment of device related trauma |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- patients who have read and understood patient information leaflets about the study and undergo informed consent.
- patients whose anaesthesia management is being carried out by one of the named investigators
- adult (age >18 years) patients undergoing general anaesthesia
- American Society of Anaesthesiology Grading (ASA) 1-3
- suitability for general anaesthesia using a laryngeal mask airway device
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- the presence of significant acute or chronic lung disease
- pathology of neck or upper respiratory tract
- an identified or anticipated difficult intubation
- an increased risk of aspiration (hiatus hernia, gastro-oesophageal reflux or full stomach etc.) pregnant women
- a body mass index greater than 35kg.m-2
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and IgelInsertion of Ambu AuraGain and iGel laryngeal mask airways in accordance with manufacturer instruction | Device | AuraGain and i-Gel, i-Gel and AuraGain |
| Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scopePassage of Ambu a-scope fibrescope down shaft of laryngeal mask airway and assessment of alignment with glottis in relation to amount of glottis that is easily visualised | Device | AuraGain and i-Gel, i-Gel and AuraGain |
| Ability to insert nasogastric tubePassage of nasogastric tube down the gastric drainage channel of the device in accordance with manufacturer guidance | Device | AuraGain and i-Gel, i-Gel and AuraGain |
| Measurement of OLPMeasurement of OLP by closing the adjustable pressure limiting valve against a constant fresh gas flow rate of 3 litres/minute | Device | AuraGain and i-Gel, i-Gel and AuraGain |
| Ability to perform positive pressure ventilationThe ability to deliver 6 mls/kg volumes breaths by means of positive pressure ventilation will be assessed | Device | AuraGain and i-Gel, i-Gel and AuraGain |
| Assessment of ease of insertionEase of insertion will be subjectively assessed by operator in relation to presence and nature of resistance to insertion of the device | Device | AuraGain and i-Gel, i-Gel and AuraGain |
| Record number of manipulationsThe number of manipulations/adjustments will be recorded for the second device only for the remainder of the device use during surgery until the patient wakes. | Device | AuraGain and i-Gel, i-Gel and AuraGain |
| Assessment of device related traumaObservation and assessment of any trauma caused by the insertion of the first device used | Device | AuraGain and i-Gel, i-Gel and AuraGain |
Primary outcome
oropharyngeal leak pressure
Time frame: Up to 3 minutes of successful insertion of each device
If successful ventilation is achieved with the device, the investigator will measure OLP by closing the Adjustable Pressure Limiting valve on the anaesthetic machine; with a fresh gas flow of 3l/min. Pressure at which equilibrium is reached will be deemed the OLP. Pressure will not be allowed to exceed 40cmH20.
7 secondary outcomes
Ease of insertion
Time frame: Up to 1 minute on each insertion attempt
Number of attempts required to insert
Time frame: Up to 1 minute of completion of total insertion attempts
Evidence of Airway Trauma
Time frame: Up to 1 minute after removal of first device used
Adequacy of positive pressure ventilation
Time frame: Up to 1 minute after successful insertion of device and after completion of outcome 4 measurement
Fibreoptic assessment of device position
Time frame: Up to 5 minutes after successful insertion and after completion of outcome 5 measurement
Ability to insert nasogastric tube down gastric channel of device
Time frame: Up to 5 minutes after successful insertion and after completion of outcome 6 measurement
Intraoperative manipulations required
Time frame: For up to 2 hours after induction of anaesthesia
Results and safety
The study was stopped early (reason given: Unsuccessful attempts to recruit participants). Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Dec 2017.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Airway Management
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Effect of Neuromuscular Blocking Agent Use on Video Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion
Airway Management, Supraglottic Airway Device Insertion
Not yet recruiting
Video Laryngeal Mask SaCoVLM Versus LMA Supreme and Ambu AuraGain in Children
Airway Management, Anesthesia, General
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Prediction of Difficult Mask Ventilation in Obese Population Undergoing Emergency Surgery
Difficult Airway Management
Not yet recruitingObservational study
A Novel Score for Procedural Difficulty During Videolaryngoscopic Intubation
Intubation, Intratracheal, Airway Management
Active, not recruiting
The Comfort of Proactive Sleep Apnea Therapy
Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Sleep Apnea
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Simon M Crawley, MBChB FRCA principal investigator
Consultant Anaesthetist
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Insertion of Ambu AuraGain laryngeal mask airway and Igel, Fibreoptic assessment with Ambu A-scope and Ability to insert nasogastric tube in people with Airway Management and Laryngeal Mask Airway, run by NHS Tayside at 1 site in United Kingdom.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Dec 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was stopped early (reason given: Unsuccessful attempts to recruit participants). Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
oropharyngeal leak pressure (time frame: Up to 3 minutes of successful insertion of each device). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Dec 2017.