Gupta B, Gupta S, Hijam B, Shende P, Rewari V. J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2015 Oct-Dec;8(4):188-92
Insertion of i-gel, ProSeal and LMA Classic were studied in prone position. Time to insertion, ease of insertion, bronchoscopic view an insertion score were compared. i-gel was the quickest and easiest to insert.
Link to abstract
Tags :
2015,
Gupta B,
J Emerg Trauma Shock,
Adult,
RCT,
Rescue,
Emergency medicine,
Manikin study,
vs ProSeal,
vs LMA,
Prone,
Resuscitation,
Free
e87e652d-e4fe-4c2b-b089-f82fb3b598ab|1|3.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Bala R, Hazarika A, Pandia MP, Kumar N. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2015 Oct-Dec;31(4):568
Report of failed ProSeal insertion, with i-gel successfully inserted in its place at the first attempt.
Link to abstract
28d22f3f-97ab-4c75-b27c-131440cd7389|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Taxak S, Gopinath A, Saini S, Bansal T, Ahlawat MS, Bala M. Saudi J Anaesth. 2015 Oct-Dec;9(4):446-50
40 patients were allocated to either the i-gel or ProSeal group. Insertion of i-gel on first attempt was successful in 17 of 20 patients, compared to 16 for ProSeal, and was faster to insert. Authors conclude ProSeal provided the better seal but insertion was easier with i-gel.
Link to abstract
5e4599ee-3a2b-427f-a58c-77b3005e7976|1|4.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Park SY, Rim JC, Kim H, Lee JH, Chung CJ. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2015 Oct;68(5):455-61
93 patients were allocated into i-gel or LMA Supreme groups, with insertion time, attempts and fibreoptic view of glottis recorded. No significant differences were recorded.
Link to abstract
32e902d0-26a4-4a4d-ba24-a474eadeeda7|1|4.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Choi CG, Yang KH, Jung JK, Han JU, Lee CS, Cha YD, Song JH. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2015 Oct;68(5):501-4
Report of i-gel used to ventilate a 59-year-old male with rotator cuff syndrome after failed tracheal intubation.
Link to abstract
2b57531e-0238-4c38-a373-7c0dd11b298f|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c