i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

Mishra SK, Sivaraman B, Balachander H, Naggapa M, Parida S, Bhat RR, Yuvaraj K. Anesth Essays Res. 2015 Sep-Dec;9(3):353-8

60 patients were enrolled to either i-gel or ProSeal groups, with the primary objective to compare sealing pressure. Authors conclude ProSeal gave a better seal.

Link to abstract

Zhang JQ, Meng FM, Xue FS, Li RP. Saudi Med J. 2015 Sep;36(9):1130

Questions raised as to the interpretation of results given, particularly user experience and insertion method of ProSeal. Response from original study author is also declared within.

Link to abstract

Polat R, Aydin GB, Ergil J, Sayin M, Kokulu T, Ozturk I. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2015 Sep-Oct;65(5):343-8

Performance of i-gel vs LMA Classic was measured in 120 patients, with respect to successful insertion attempts, insertion time, peak airway pressure, regurgitation, fibreoptic glottic view and postoperative complications. i-gel gave a shorter insertion time and better fibreoptic view.

Link to abstract