Introduction: The invention of supraglottic devices changed the focus of airway management during general anaesthesia (GA) from intubation to oxygenation and ventilation. There were many improvements in LMA with regard to intubation facility, anatomical similarity and increase in cuff volume. Hence comparative studies with various types of LMA is essential for its proper selection as per the need. Aim: The aim was to compare the utility of three different supraglottic airway devices namely Classic LMA, Proseal LMA and Blockbuster LMA. Materials and Methods: This was a randomized single blind triple arm study involving 30 patients in each three groups. (Group C: classic LMA, Group P: proseal LMA and Group B: block buster LMA). The number of attempts, time and ease for insertion, sealing pressure, hemodynamic changes and complications were studied. SPSS software was used for statistical analysis. One-way ANOVA, Tukey HDS and chi-square test were used. The p value of < 0.05 was statistically significant. Results: The time needed for insertion was significantly less with Proseal group and it was easy to insert than others. It also has less incidence of sore throat, blood staining and displacement. There was no significant difference with regards to attempt on first insertion, airway sealing pressure or hemodynamic changes between three groups. The block buster type was easy to insert and had less rate of complications than the classical type. Conclusion: All the three supraglottic airway devices (classic, proseal, blockbuster LMA) can be safely used during GA and Positive Pressure Ventilation. Proseal LMA was quickly inserted than other types in this study with less complications than blockbuster type.

Introduction: The invention of supraglottic devices changed the focus of airway management during general anaesthesia (GA) from intubation to oxygenation and ventilation. There were many improvements in LMA with regard to intubation facility, anatomical similarity and increase in cuff volume. Hence comparative studies with various types of LMA is essential for its proper selection as per the need. Aim: The aim was to compare the utility of three different supraglottic airway devices namely Classic LMA, Proseal LMA and Blockbuster LMA. Materials and Methods: This was a randomized single blind triple arm study involving 30 patients in each three groups. (Group C: classic LMA, Group P: proseal LMA and Group B: block buster LMA). The number of attempts, time and ease for insertion, sealing pressure, hemodynamic changes and complications were studied. SPSS software was used for statistical analysis. One-way ANOVA, Tukey HDS and chi-square test were used. The p value of < 0.05 was statistically significant. Results: The time needed for insertion was significantly less with Proseal group and it was easy to insert than others. It also has less incidence of sore throat, blood staining and displacement. There was no significant difference with regards to attempt on first insertion, airway sealing pressure or hemodynamic changes between three groups. The block buster type was easy to insert and had less rate of complications than the classical type. Conclusion: All the three supraglottic airway devices (classic, proseal, blockbuster LMA) can be safely used during GA and Positive Pressure Ventilation. Proseal LMA was quickly inserted than other types in this study with less complications than blockbuster type.