Viernes DC, Joffe AM, Goldman AJ. Anaesthesiology News Guide to Airway Management 2010; 9-14
This paper describes the history of the gastric channel in supraglottic airways, providing case reports and performance comparisons between devices. The section on the i-gel® states that the device has inferior seal pressure compared to the LMA Proseal®, but that drainage through the gastric channel was comparable. The i-gel® is quicker and easier to place than standard LMAs. A case report is included which describes the successful use of a size five i-gel® in a 63-year-old man with a difficult airway.
Monclus E, Garces A, Vassileva I, Sanchez A, Banchs R. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2010; 27(47): 155
70 children who were already scheduled for a cranial MRI scan took part in this study. The epiglottis was found to be in the bowl of the i-gel® in all patients, however the device still performed well.
Link to abstract.
Asai T, Liu EH. Masui 2010; 59(6): 794-797
In this study, the i-gel® was used to ventilate 20 spontaneously breathing adult patients during anaesthesia. Insertion time, success rate, ability to insert a gastric tube and complications (including the presence of blood on the device) were recorded. The i-gel® was inserted on the first attempt in 19 of 20 patients and had a mean insertion time of 12 seconds. Gastric tube insertion was possible in all cases. Removal was uneventful for all patients and did not result in any complications. The authors believe that the i-gel® is a useful device for maintaining the patient airway during general anaesthesia.
Zaballos M, Bastida E, del Castillo T, de Villoria JG, Jiménez C. Anaesthesia 2010; 65(6): 569-572
In this study, the artefacts created during MRI by six supraglottic airways, the Classic LMA®, the ProSeal LMA®, the LMA Unique®, the LMA Supreme®, the Ambu® disposable laryngeal mask and the i-gel® were investigated. There were no artefacts with the i-gel® or Ambu® devices.