Choi GJ, Kang H, Baek CW, Jung YH, Woo YC, Cha YJ. Anaesthesia. 2014 Nov;69(11):1258-65
A review of 9 randomised controlled trials suggested that clinical performance of i-gel was similar to LMA, save for leak pressure and fibreoptic view, both of which favoured i-gel.
Link to abstract
3286a0a2-a7bc-4e4e-9c28-6558f9503692|1|3.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Maitra S, Baidya DK, Bhattacharjee S, Khanna P. Paediatr Anaesth. 2014 Oct;24(10):1072-9
A total of nine studies were included using search keywords, with results finding that i-gel gave significantly higher leak pressure and ProSeal. Authors conclude it is an effective alternative to ProSeal and cLMA.
Link to abstract
b4b8b390-018f-4196-82e9-686b5cf2a2c2|1|1.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
de Montblanc J, Ruscio L, Mazoit JX, Benhamou D. Anaesthesia. 2014 Oct;69(10):1151-62
31 adult randomised controlled trials on i-gel against the LMA were assessed, finding that the main clinical advantage of i-gel was less frequent sore throat.
Link to abstract
801ac0e0-4582-48d0-aacc-e40cc7f389ad|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Reza Hashemian SM, Nouraei N, Razavi SS, Zaker E, Jafari A, Eftekhari P, Radmand G, Mohajerani SA, Radpay B. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci. 2014 Oct-Dec;4(4):288-92
64 patients assigned to either i-gel or cLMA groups in this randomised controlled trial. Results showed i-gel was 'significantly' quicker to insert.
Link to abstract
daa8290a-8403-484a-b125-ea9c17368648|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Kim MS, Oh JT, Min JY, Lee KH, Lee JR. Anaesthesia. 2014 Apr;69(4):362-7
54 infants were allocated with success rate at first attempt and fibreoptic views measured. First-attempt success was 100% for i-gel, compared to 69 in LMA.
Link to abstract
b95725fc-bb4e-47bb-b327-529faea9080c|1|5.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c