i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

Arévalo-Ludeña J, Arcas-Bellas JJ, Alvarez-Rementería R, Alameda LE. J Clin Anesth. 2016 Dec;35:287-292

After i-gel insertion in 85 adult patients, general anaesthesia was induced to place an endotracheal tube by fibreoptic bronchoscope. i-gel insertion time, intubation time and oxygen saturation were monitored. Authors conclude this to be a safe and effective technique.

Link to abstract.

Watanabe A, Edanaga M, Ichinose H, Yamakage M. J Clin Anesth. 2016 Nov;34:223-6

Randomised study comparing insertion attempts, insertion time and postoperative complications (among other parameters recorded) on 37 adult patients after concerns that the i-gel sometimes fails to fit or ventilate sufficiently in Japanese patients. Results showed that two patients in the Air-Qsp group failed, compared to one in the i-gel group.

Link to abstract

Maitra S, Baidya DK, Arora MK, Bhattacharjee S, Khanna P. J Clin Anesth. 2016 Sep;33:298-305

Meta-analysis of 10 RCTs to assess results when comparing the oropharyngeal leak pressure of each device. LMA ProSeal returned more favourable results, although i-gel deemed easier to insert. ProSeal also reported higher blood staining.

Link to abstract.

Arevalo-Ludeña J, Arcas-Bellas JJ, Alvarez-Rementería R, Flandes J, Morís L, Muñoz Alameda LE. J Clin Anesth. 2016 Jun;31:137-41

Prospective observational study on 22 patients comparing the use of i-gel against orotracheal intubation. Tidal volume, peak pressure, gas leaks and adverse events were recorded. Authors conclude i-gel is 'an effective and safe alternative' to OTI in this scenario.

Link to abstract

Deguchi S, Komasawa N, Kido H, Omori M, Minami T. J Clin Anesth. 2016;30:61-2

Study to test the pH levels in the i-gel after removal.

Link to abstract