Metterlein T, Dintenfelder A, Plank C, Graf B, Roth G. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2017 Mar - Apr;67(2):166-171
Random assignment of 52 adult patients to different supraglottic devices, from: Laryngeal Tube, LMA, i-gel, LMA Unique, LMA Supreme and Aura-once. After successful ventilation, device positioning was examined to assess glottic opening. Glottic view ranged from 40% for Laryngeal Tube to 90%, with i-gel recording 70%.
Link to abstract.
ccbed67c-b455-4955-a35f-5945b2d6ccdf|1|1.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Gu Z, Jin Q, Liu J, Chen L. J Clin Monit Comput. 2016 Aug 4. [Epub ahead of print]
105 patients were including in this paediatric study, with primary outcomes including leak pressure and respiratory dynamic data. Authors conclude that the 'i-gel presented a better sealing effect and fewer adverse reactions.'
Link to abstract
c75b5089-13c8-457f-9f24-98209bc33c6e|1|2.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Aqil M, Delvi B, Abujamea A, Alzahrani T, Alzahem A, Mansoor S, Aaljazaeri A. Minerva Anestesiol. 2016 Jun 17
Sixty paediatric patients were split between the two groups, with scans of head and neck performed after confirmation of device placement. Both devices 'significantly' reduced the area of glottis opening. i-gel produced greater dilation of upper oesophogeal sphincter. Authors conclude more studies needed to test these results to 'reduce morbidity on pediatric airway'.
Link to abstract
3772bda4-5111-4dfd-862a-26ee0c71b539|1|5.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Smith P, Bailey CR. Anaesthesia. 2015 Jan;70(1):84-92
Review of 62 published articles, including 14 randomised controlled trials, comparing i-gel with other supraglottic airway devices in children. Leak pressure was found to be the most common primary outcome. Authors conclude i-gel is 'at least equivalent' to other devices, and may give higher leak pressures and improved fibreoptic view of the glottis.
Link to abstract
Tags :
2015,
Smith P,
Anaesthesia,
Paediatric,
Comparison trial,
Review,
vs LMA,
vs LMA Supreme,
vs ProSeal,
vs AuraOnce,
Free
30e8cbbf-20a7-485b-95ed-155f3a45b1b3|1|1.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Weil G, Matysiak J, Guye ML, Eghiaian A, Bourgain JL. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2014 Sep-Oct;33(9-10):508-13
Using LMA Unique as a reference, cost efficacy comparisons were made against i-gel, Ambu AuraOnce and LMA Supreme. Conclusions suggested that latest generation devices are still expensive despite low rate of complications.
Link to abstract
de5c7451-0a1c-4e9c-98f6-4cc7e7e8dbe1|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c