• C H R Wiese, J Bahr, A F Popov, J M Hinz, and B M Graf.
• Department of Anaesthesiology, Emergency and Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Centre Goettingen, Georg-August-University, Robert Koch Strasse 40, D-37075 Göttingen, Germany. cwiese@zari.de
• Resuscitation. 2009 Jan 1;80(1):100-3.

BackgroundIn 2005 the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) published a revised version of the guidelines for Advanced Life Support (ALS). One of the aims was to reduce the time without chest compression in the first period of cardiac arrest (no-flow-time; NFT). We evaluated in a manikin study the influence on NFT using the single use laryngeal tube with suction option (LTS-D) compared to single use I-gel for emergency airway management.MethodsA randomised prospective study with 200 paramedics who performed standardised simulated cardiac arrest management in a manikin.ResultsThe use of the LTS-D did not significantly reduce NFT compared with the I-gel (104.7s vs. 105.1s; p>0.05). The LTS-D was inserted as fast as the I-gel (10.4s vs. 9.3s; p>0.05). The LTS-D was correctly positioned by 98% of the participants on the first attempt compared to 96% with the I-gel. During the cardiac arrest simulation, establishing and performing first ventilation took an average of 40.5s with the LTS-D compared to 40.9s with the I-gel.ConclusionIn our manikin study, NFT was comparable using the LTS-D and the I-gel. Therefore, for personnel not experienced in tracheal intubation, the LTS-D and the I-gel seem to be equal alternatives in establishing the airway during cardiac arrest. However, relevant clinical studies are appropriate because any change in guidelines in this area must be based on clinical evidence.

21 keywords...

hide…