Comparison of videolaryngoscope-guided versus standard digital insertion techniques of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway: a prospective randomized study

Table 2 Comparative data of PLMA insertions. Data are mean ± standard deviation, frequencies or median (min-max)

Variables	Group V (n = 60)	Group D (n = 59)	P value	Effect size with 95% C.I.
Insertion success (n)
First attempt	60	53 (89.8%)		0.19 (0.01–0.36)^a
Second attempt	0	4 (6.7%)	0.029	0.09 (−0.08–0.27)^b
Third attempt	0	1 (1.6%)		NaN^c
Overall	60/60 (100%)	59/60 (98.3%)
Insertion time (sec)	38.36 ± 6.44	28.59 ± 9.44	< 0.001
Oropharyngeal leak pressure (cmH₂O)	30.28 ± 8.3	29.86 ± 6.91	0.764
Leak volume (L)	0.13 ± 0.15	0.19 ± 0.26	0.143
Fibreoptic score	4 (3–4)	3 (1–4)	< 0.001
Peak inspiratuar pressure (cmH₂O)	11.21 ± 2.94	13.01 ± 3.73	0.004
Orogastric tube insertion
easy / difficult / impossible	60/0/0	46/11/2	< 0.001

Group V, videolaryngoscope-guided group; Group D, standard digital group; ^a First and second attempts by the groups (2 × 2 crossstab); ^b First and third attempts by the groups (2 × 2 crossstab); ^c second and third attempts by the groups (2 × 2 crossstab) can not be computed

ISSN: 1471-2253