Supraglottic airway devices (SADs) are important tools for airway management. Supraglottic airway devices have been introduced into brief surgical interventions because they are less invasive than intubation and safer than mask to maintain the patency of airway after induction of anesthesia. They are inserted via the oral route and can be used as conduit for endotracheal intubation. In the current study we aim to compare Air-Q TM Blocker intubating laryngeal airway versus Laryseal TM pro laryngeal mask regarding total insertion time of laryngeal mask and endotracheal tube ,as well as ease of device insertion and any added manipulation done for successful insertion, effect on hemodynamics, SPO2 and post operative complications. Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted in Kasr Al-Ainy university hospitals, after obtaining approval from Kasr Al-Ainy hospital research ethical committee, written informed consents were taken from 64 patients, all of whom completed this study. Patients were randomly allocated into 2 equal groups, 32 each, according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. AirQ TM Blocker group (n=32): Where Air-Q TM Blocker laryngeal airway was used for ventilation & blind intubation. Laryseal TM Pro group ( n=32): Where laryseal TM Pro laryngeal mask was used for ventilation & blind intubation. Results: In our study revealed that Total insertion time (SAD and ETT) was insignificantly different between both groups (P-value 0.816). Regarding the effect on hemodynamics, SPO2 and post-operative complications as sore throat, dysphagia, hoarseness of voice; there was no significant difference between both devices. Conclusion: Laryseal pro showed to be as efficient as Air Q blocker regarding the total insertion time of the device and endotracheal tube.