Standard anaesthesia technique was followed for all the patients. Inj. fentanyl 2 µg/kg IV was given. After 2mins, anaesthesia was induced  with Inj.propofol 2 mg/kg IV. Adequacy of ventilation was assessed and muscle relaxation was achieved with Inj. vecuronium bromide 0.1mg/Kg IV. Patient was ventilated with 100% O2 and isoflurane≤1%  for 3 mins. Subsequently the pre-checked and prepared airway device (Airtraq or ILMA) of appropriate size was inserted according to the standard technique after applying MILS. Hemodynamic parameters (HR, NIBP) was recorded just before device insertion  and then every minute till 10 mins after intubation.

The Primary outcome variable was time taken for intubation and it was taken from holding the airway device for insertion to the first square shaped capnograph (T1+T2). The number of attempts for insertion of airway device were noted. Pulse rate and mean arterial pressure were recorded after insertion of airway device in both the groups every minute for the first ten minutes. Complication like trauma to lip/tongue/oral mucosa and presence of blood on device after removal were noted. Statistical analysis of the data was done using the SSPS software version 22.0. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

There were no statistically significant differences in demographic characteristics between the groups. The mean time taken for the insertion of the airway device in the ILMA group was 1.43 ± 0.61 mins and in the Airtraq group was 0.21 ± 0.11 mins. The difference is statistically significant. Even though the time taken for intubation in the ILMA group is significantly longer than the Airtraq group, the uninterrupted ventilation maintained during intubation in the ILMA group ensured adequate oxygenation. In the ILMA group it was seen that airway device was inserted in first attempt in 88% patients and a second attempt was needed in the remaining 12%. In the Airtraq group, airway of all patients (100%) was successfully secured in first attempt and this difference was found to be statistically significant (p=0.027). The intubator found intubation using Airtraq easier than intubating with ILMA as graded by the Likert scale ( 4 vs 3 in Airtraq group vs ILMA group). In the hemodynamic parameters, we found that baseline values for both heart rate and MAP in both the groups were similar without any significant difference. However, when the heart rate was compared at different time frames from the insertion of the airway devices i.e. at 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 minutes of insertion it was found that the mean difference between both the groups was statistically significant. It was observed that the heart rate in Airtraq group is more controlled and stable as compared to the ILMA group. We observed that there was immediate rise in MAP (at 1, 2 and 3 mins) in both the groups after insertion of the airway device which was more in the ILMA group as compared to the Airtraq group, though this difference was not statistically significant. This could have been due to the sympathetic stimulation seen during airway manipulation.Subsequently, when the MAP was compared at time frames of 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  minutes after insertion of the airway device in both the groups, the difference was statistically significant and  the readings were found to be more controlled in the Airtraq group as compared to the ILMA group. Blood stain on the ILMA device after removal was seen in 2 patients as compared to none seen in the Airtraq group. The difference was statistically not significant.