The supraglottic airway I-gel in comparison with ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and classic laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized patients

Abstract

I-gel may have a similar airway sealing to that of pLMA, higher than that of cLMA, and is not associated with adverse events. The I-gel might be an effective alternative as a supraglottic airway device.

A prospective randomised comparison of two insertion methods for i-gel™placement in anaesthetised paralysed patients: standard vs rotational technique

“…In this study, the first-attempt insertion success rate was significantly higher in the rotation group than in the standard group. This success rate is consistent with previous reports, in which the primary success rate for i-gel insertion with the standard technique was 78-93% [8,10,17]. Our previous reports comparing two insertion techniques for the ProSeal LMA showed that the success rate at the first attempt was significantly higher in the rotation group than in the standard technique group [13][14][15], similar to the present study using the i-gel.…”

“…The incidence of i-gel insertion failure was 4.4% in this study. Similar incidence rates were reported in previous studies, in which the overall failure rate for i-gel insertion was 0-4% [8,10]. The main reason for fail- ure to insert the ProSeal LMA or i-gel is impaction at the back of the mouth by tongue folding [11,12,18].…”

“…However, two previous studies showed that the success rate of i-gel insertion is high, even for novices [8,17]. We also think that our results can be generalised because the success rate, insertion time, and seal pressure in the standard technique group were similar to data from other experienced operators [8,10,21].…”

“…The secondary endpoints were oropharyngeal air leak pressure, postoperative sore throat, insertion time and the position of the i-gel. A sample size calculation was based on the previous report by Shin et al [10], in which the firstattempt insertion success rate using the standard technique was 78%. We assumed that a 15% increase in success rate would be clinically relevant, and calculated the minimum sample size to be 83 patients in each group with a type-1 error of 0.05 and a power of 0.8.…”

“…The success rate of i-gel insertion at the first attempt varies from 78% to 93%, with a relatively high success rate after two attempts of 84-100% [8][9][10]. When multiple attempts are made, the i-gel may cause trauma in the oral cavity or supraglottic structures due to the large size of its cuff and body.…”