Peker G, Takmaz SA, Baltacı B, Başar H, Kotanoğlu M. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2015 Oct;43(5):304-12
Prospective, randomised study on 60 children aged 1-10 years. Insertion attempts and ease, leak pressure and complications were recorded. Results suggest no difference between the devices under these conditions.
Link to abstract
39b0dbcd-e0dd-4399-a5d5-02db339a636f|1|3.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Arı DE, Ar AY, Karip CŞ, Siyahkoç İ, Arslan AH, Akgün FN. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2015 Oct;43(5):299-303
Insertion time and successful first attempt incidence were measured within the 50 patients assigned to the device groups. i-gel was quicker to insert with other results 'did not differ'. Authors conclude i-gel may be 'a more advantageous' device compared with LMA.
Link to abstract
29b7ab7f-cc52-4adb-82d5-fd399036175d|1|2.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Wetsch WA, Schneider A, Schier R, Spelten O, Hellmich M, Hinkelbein J. Eur J Emerg Med. 2015 Oct;22(5):374-6
Manikin study to assess speed of effective ventilation administered in a simulated motor vehicle accident victim, comparing i-gel against tracheal intubation, Ambu AuraOnce and laryngeal tube. Fastest effective ventilation achieved with i-gel.
Link to abstract
Tags :
Difficult Airways,
Manikin study,
Comparison trial,
Reduced access patient,
Road traffic collision victim,
vs ETT,
vs Ambu,
vs Laryngeal Tube Suction-D,
Fast insertion time,
Speed of insertion,
Adult,
2015,
European Journal of Emergency Medicine
3a00ed29-314e-4c71-8004-2b1372164ad9|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Badheka JP, Jadliwala RM, Chhaya VA, Parmar VS, Vasani A, Rajyaguru AM. J Minim Access Surg. 2015 Oct-Dec;11(4):251-6
60 patients were randomly assigned to either the i-gel or ETT group. Ease, insertion attempts and insertion time were measured, followed by gastric tube insertion attempts and perioperative complications. i-gel was quicker to insert and is a safe and suitable alternative to ETT in this scenario.
Link to abstract
5fec66c5-96b0-4202-8bae-bde43113f519|1|3.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Cook TM, Kelly FE. Br J Anaesth. 2015 Oct;115(4):497-9
Editorial posing the question of whether the cLMA still has a place in 'modern airway practice or whether it is time to move on'. The authors highlight that with the choice of second-generation devices available, including i-gel, perhaps it is time to abandon the first-generation predecessors.
Link to abstract
8b6d9d90-34f3-491c-ba87-d6ac83b981b6|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c