i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

A comprehensive list of all known published clinical evidence on the device

Lubrication of the i-gel® supraglottic airway and the classic laryngeal mask airway

Chapman D. Anaesthesia 2010; 65(1): 89

This letter is a response to the 2009 study by Janakiraman (see page 7) et al. which compared the i-gel® to the LMA Classic®. In that study, the authors stated that the devices were lubricated along the tip and the posterior surface. However, the correct lubrication procedure for the i-gel® is different; the thermoplastic material used to make the device is tacky until lubricated and requires lubrication on all four sides of the cuff.

Abstract text

Comparison of fibrescope guided intubation via the classic laryngeal mask airway and i-gel® in a manikin

De Lloyd L, Hodzovic I, Voisey S, Wilkes AR, Latto IP. Anaesthesia 2010; 65(1): 36-43

This randomised crossover study compared the cLMA® to the i-gel® during endotracheal intubation of a manikin. 32 anaesthetists took part in the study. For each device, two intubations took place with the tracheal tube directly over the fibrescope and two used an Aintree Intubation Catheter. Intubation took significantly less time with the i-gel® using both methods. Five oesophageal intubations occurred with the cLMA. Anaesthetists stated a preference for the i-gel® due to the ease of use. The authors conclude that the i-gel® is a more appropriate choice for intubation than the cLMA.

Link to abstract.