Background: The safety and adverse event rate of supraglottic airway (SGA) devices for cesarean delivery (CD) is poorly characterized. The primary aims of this review were to determine whether the first-pass success was higher and time to insertion for SGA was faster than endotracheal intubation for elective CD. The secondary aim was to determine the airway-related adverse event rate associated with SGA use compared to endotracheal intubation in elective CD under general anesthesia (GA).
Methods: Six databases were systematically searched until September 2019. Included studies reported on the use of SGA in comparison to endotracheal tube intubation. A comparative meta-analysis between SGA and endotracheal intubation was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Dichotomous outcomes were reported using an odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The results for continuous outcomes were reported using a weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI.
Results: Fourteen studies with 2236 patients compared SGA and endotracheal intubation. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference in first-attempt success rate (OR = 1.92; 95% CI, 0.85-4.32; I = 0%; P = .44). There was no clinically significant difference in time to insertion (WMD = -15.80 seconds; 95% CI, -25.30 to -6.31 seconds; I= 100%; P = .001). Similarly, there was no difference in any adverse event rate except sore throat which was reduced with the use of an SGA (OR = 0.16; 95% CI, 0.08-0.32; I= 53%; P < .001).
Conclusions: Despite the reasonable insertion success rate and safety profile of SGAs demonstrated in this meta-analysis, the analysis remains underpowered and therefore inconclusive. At present, further studies are required before the use of an SGA as the first-line airway for an elective CD can be recommended.