Skip to main content

  1. Shaikh A, Robinson PN, Hasan M. The Tulip GT® airway versus the facemask and Guedel airway: a randomised, controlled, cross-over study by Basic Life Support-trained airway providers in anaesthetised patients. Anaesthesia 2016 Mar; 71(3): 315-9.
  2. Robinson PN, Shaikh A, Sabir NM, Vaughan DJA, Kynoch M, Hasan M. A pilot study to examine the effect of the Tulip® oropharyngeal airway on ventilation immediately after mask ventilation following the induction of anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 2014; 69: 707-711.
  3. Harrison S, Robinson NP, Shaikh A, Yentis SM. Manikin evaluation of the Tulip – a new supraglottic airway. Anaesthesia 2009; 64: 807.
  4. Kynoch M, Saini R, Robinson PN, Shaikh A, Hasan M, Vaughan D. Randomised crossover comparison of the Tulip airway compared with the Guedel airway for inexperienced users in a manikin. Anaesthesia 2013; 68: 317.
  5. Shaikh A, Robinson PN; An ADEPT apology. Anaesthesia 2012; 67:
  6. Robinson NP, Shaikh A; Manikin studies are essential in airway research.  Anaesthesia 2011, On-line correspondence: http://www.respond2articles.com/ANA/forums/thread/909.aspx
  7. Murashima K, Ozaki M. New supraglottic airway device Tulip is easy to insert: a manikin study. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2011; 112: S05.
  8. Imashuku Y, Kitagawa H, Mizuno T, Usefulness of Tulip Airway in Edentulous Elderly Patients, Anesth. Prog. 2022 Sep 1; 69(3): 9-12. doi: 10.2344/anpr-69-01-01.
  9. Dayal M, Bhatia PS, Shobha VA, Randomized Comparison of Patient’s Ventilation at Induction of Anaesthesia Between Tulip GT® Airway and Guedel Airway-Face Mask by Anaesthesia Residents. Ann. Int. Med. Den. Res. 2019; 5(4): AN32-AN35.
  10. Benumof J, Hagberg CA. Benumof and Hagberg’s Airway Management, 2012, Elsevier Saunders.
  11. Alexander R, Hodgson P, Lomax D, Bullen C. A comparison of the laryngeal mask airway and Guedel airway, bag and facemask for manual ventilation following formal training. Anaesthesia 1993; 48: 231-4.
  12. Tolley PM, Watts AD, Hickman JA. Comparison of the use of the laryngeal mask and face mask by inexperienced personnel. British Journal of Anaesthesia 1992; 69: 320-1.
  13. Martin PD, Cyna AM, Hunter WA, Henry J, Ramayya GP. Training nursing staff in airway management for resuscitation. A clinical comparison of the facemask and laryngeal mask. Anaesthesia 1993; 48: 33-7.
  14. Vogel C. Dental injuries during general anaesthesia and their forensic consequences. Anaesthetist 1979; 28: 347-9.
  15. Hasegawa K, Hiraide A, Chang Y, Brown DFM. Association of pre-hospital advanced airway management with neurologic outcome and survival in patients with out of hospital cardiac arrest. Journal of the American Medical Association 2013; 309(3): 257-266.
  16. Barker P, Langton JA, Murphy PJ, Rowbotham DJ. Reurgitation of gastric contents during general anaesthesia using the laryngeal mask airway. British Journal of Anaesthesia 1992; 69: 314-5.
  17. Rabey PG, Murphy PJ, Langton JA, Barker P, Rowbotham DJ. Effect of the laryngeal mask airway on lower oesophageal sphincter pressure in patients during general anaesthesia. British Journal of Anaesthesia 1992; 69: 346-8.
  18. Keller C, Brimacombe J, Radler C, Puhringer F. Do laryngeal mask airway devices attenuate liquid flow between the oesophagus and the pharynx? A randomized, controlled cadaver study. Anesthesia and Analgesia 1999; 88; 904-7.
  19. Schmidbauer W, Genzwurker H, Ahlers O, Proquitte H, Kerner T. Cadaver study of oesophageal insufflation with supraglottic airway devices during positive pressure ventilation in an obstructed airway. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2012; 109: 454-8.
  20. Ho-Tai LM, Devitt JH, Noel AG, O’Donnell MP. Gas leak and gastric insufflation during controlled ventilation: face mask versus laryngeal mask airway. Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 1998; 45: 206-11.
  21. Helmy AM, Atef HM, Wl-Taher EM, Henidak AM. Comparative study between I-gel, a new supraglottic airway device, and classic laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetised spontaneously ventilated patients. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia 2010; 4: 131-6.
  22. Hsu YW, Pan MH, Huang CJ, Cheng CR, Wu KH, Wei TT, Chen CT. Comparison of the cuffed oropharyngeal airway and laryngeal mask airway in spontaneously breathing anaesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiologica Sinica 1998; 36: 187-92.
  23. Pusch F, Wildling E, Freitag H, Goll V, Hoerauf K, Weinstabl C. A prospective randomized trial comparing the cuffed oropharyngeal airway (COPA) with the laryngeal mask for elective minor surgery in female patients. Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift 2001; 113: 33-7.
  24. Brimacombe J, Berry A. The cuffed oropharyngeal airway for spontaneous ventilation anaesthesia. Clinical appraisal in 100 patients. Anaesthesia 1998; 53: 1074-9.
  25. Greenberg RS, Brimacombe J, Berry A, Gouze V, Piantadosi S, Dake EM. A randomized controlled trial comparing the cuffed oropharyngeal airway and the laryngeal mask in spontaneously breathing anaesthetized adults. Anesthesiology 1998; 88: 970-7.
  26. Pandit JJ, Popat MT, Cook TM, Wilkes AR, Groom P, Cooke H, Kapila A, O’Sullivan E. The Difficult Airway Society ‘ADEPT’ guidance on selecting airway devices: the basis of a strategy for equipment evaluation. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 726-37.
  27. Jackson K, Cook T. Evaluation of four airway training manikins as patient simulators for the insertion of eight types of supraglottic airway devices. Anaesthesia 2007; 62: 388-93.
  28. Popat MT, Rai MR. Evaluation of airway equipment: man or manikin? Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 1-3.
  29. Pandit JJ, Popat MT, Cook TM, et al. Corrigendum: The Difficult Airway Society ‘ADEPT’ Guidance on selecting airway devices: the basis of a strategy for equipment evaluation. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 1080.
  30. Pandit JJ, Popat MT, Cook TM, et al.; The Difficult Airway Society ‘ADEPT’ Guidance on selecting airway devices: the basis of a strategy for equipment evaluation. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 726–37.
  31. Popat MT, Rai MR. Evaluation of airway equipment: man or manikin. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 1-3.

Home
Full Explanation
Illustrations
Photos
Videos
Brochure
Instructions For Use
Instruction Manual
Clinical Projects
Other Documents
FAQ’s
References
Statement
3 Moments
Emergency Decision
Payments & Purchases
Contact Us

  1. Shaikh A, Robinson PN, Hasan M. The Tulip GT® airway versus the facemask and Guedel airway: a randomised, controlled, cross-over study by Basic Life Support-trained airway providers in anaesthetised patients. Anaesthesia 2016 Mar; 71(3): 315-9.
  2. Robinson PN, Shaikh A, Sabir NM, Vaughan DJA, Kynoch M, Hasan M. A pilot study to examine the effect of the Tulip® oropharyngeal airway on ventilation immediately after mask ventilation following the induction of anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 2014; 69: 707-711.
  3. Harrison S, Robinson NP, Shaikh A, Yentis SM. Manikin evaluation of the Tulip – a new supraglottic airway. Anaesthesia 2009; 64: 807.
  4. Kynoch M, Saini R, Robinson PN, Shaikh A, Hasan M, Vaughan D. Randomised crossover comparison of the Tulip airway compared with the Guedel airway for inexperienced users in a manikin. Anaesthesia 2013; 68: 317.
  5. Shaikh A, Robinson PN; An ADEPT apology. Anaesthesia 2012; 67:
  6. Robinson NP, Shaikh A; Manikin studies are essential in airway research.  Anaesthesia 2011, On-line correspondence: http://www.respond2articles.com/ANA/forums/thread/909.aspx
  7. Murashima K, Ozaki M. New supraglottic airway device Tulip is easy to insert: a manikin study. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2011; 112: S05.
  8. Imashuku Y, Kitagawa H, Mizuno T, Usefulness of Tulip Airway in Edentulous Elderly Patients, Anesth. Prog. 2022 Sep 1; 69(3): 9-12. doi: 10.2344/anpr-69-01-01.
  9. Dayal M, Bhatia PS, Shobha VA, Randomized Comparison of Patient’s Ventilation at Induction of Anaesthesia Between Tulip GT® Airway and Guedel Airway-Face Mask by Anaesthesia Residents. Ann. Int. Med. Den. Res. 2019; 5(4): AN32-AN35.
  10. Benumof J, Hagberg CA. Benumof and Hagberg’s Airway Management, 2012, Elsevier Saunders.
  11. Alexander R, Hodgson P, Lomax D, Bullen C. A comparison of the laryngeal mask airway and Guedel airway, bag and facemask for manual ventilation following formal training. Anaesthesia 1993; 48: 231-4.
  12. Tolley PM, Watts AD, Hickman JA. Comparison of the use of the laryngeal mask and face mask by inexperienced personnel. British Journal of Anaesthesia 1992; 69: 320-1.
  13. Martin PD, Cyna AM, Hunter WA, Henry J, Ramayya GP. Training nursing staff in airway management for resuscitation. A clinical comparison of the facemask and laryngeal mask. Anaesthesia 1993; 48: 33-7.
  14. Vogel C. Dental injuries during general anaesthesia and their forensic consequences. Anaesthetist 1979; 28: 347-9.
  15. Hasegawa K, Hiraide A, Chang Y, Brown DFM. Association of pre-hospital advanced airway management with neurologic outcome and survival in patients with out of hospital cardiac arrest. Journal of the American Medical Association 2013; 309(3): 257-266.
  16. Barker P, Langton JA, Murphy PJ, Rowbotham DJ. Reurgitation of gastric contents during general anaesthesia using the laryngeal mask airway. British Journal of Anaesthesia 1992; 69: 314-5.
  17. Rabey PG, Murphy PJ, Langton JA, Barker P, Rowbotham DJ. Effect of the laryngeal mask airway on lower oesophageal sphincter pressure in patients during general anaesthesia. British Journal of Anaesthesia 1992; 69: 346-8.
  18. Keller C, Brimacombe J, Radler C, Puhringer F. Do laryngeal mask airway devices attenuate liquid flow between the oesophagus and the pharynx? A randomized, controlled cadaver study. Anesthesia and Analgesia 1999; 88; 904-7.
  19. Schmidbauer W, Genzwurker H, Ahlers O, Proquitte H, Kerner T. Cadaver study of oesophageal insufflation with supraglottic airway devices during positive pressure ventilation in an obstructed airway. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2012; 109: 454-8.
  20. Ho-Tai LM, Devitt JH, Noel AG, O’Donnell MP. Gas leak and gastric insufflation during controlled ventilation: face mask versus laryngeal mask airway. Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 1998; 45: 206-11.
  21. Helmy AM, Atef HM, Wl-Taher EM, Henidak AM. Comparative study between I-gel, a new supraglottic airway device, and classic laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetised spontaneously ventilated patients. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia 2010; 4: 131-6.
  22. Hsu YW, Pan MH, Huang CJ, Cheng CR, Wu KH, Wei TT, Chen CT. Comparison of the cuffed oropharyngeal airway and laryngeal mask airway in spontaneously breathing anaesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiologica Sinica 1998; 36: 187-92.
  23. Pusch F, Wildling E, Freitag H, Goll V, Hoerauf K, Weinstabl C. A prospective randomized trial comparing the cuffed oropharyngeal airway (COPA) with the laryngeal mask for elective minor surgery in female patients. Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift 2001; 113: 33-7.
  24. Brimacombe J, Berry A. The cuffed oropharyngeal airway for spontaneous ventilation anaesthesia. Clinical appraisal in 100 patients. Anaesthesia 1998; 53: 1074-9.
  25. Greenberg RS, Brimacombe J, Berry A, Gouze V, Piantadosi S, Dake EM. A randomized controlled trial comparing the cuffed oropharyngeal airway and the laryngeal mask in spontaneously breathing anaesthetized adults. Anesthesiology 1998; 88: 970-7.
  26. Pandit JJ, Popat MT, Cook TM, Wilkes AR, Groom P, Cooke H, Kapila A, O’Sullivan E. The Difficult Airway Society ‘ADEPT’ guidance on selecting airway devices: the basis of a strategy for equipment evaluation. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 726-37.
  27. Jackson K, Cook T. Evaluation of four airway training manikins as patient simulators for the insertion of eight types of supraglottic airway devices. Anaesthesia 2007; 62: 388-93.
  28. Popat MT, Rai MR. Evaluation of airway equipment: man or manikin? Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 1-3.
  29. Pandit JJ, Popat MT, Cook TM, et al. Corrigendum: The Difficult Airway Society ‘ADEPT’ Guidance on selecting airway devices: the basis of a strategy for equipment evaluation. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 1080.
  30. Pandit JJ, Popat MT, Cook TM, et al.; The Difficult Airway Society ‘ADEPT’ Guidance on selecting airway devices: the basis of a strategy for equipment evaluation. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 726–37.
  31. Popat MT, Rai MR. Evaluation of airway equipment: man or manikin. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 1-3.