i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

Ragazzi R, Finessi L, Farinelli I, Alvisi R, Volta CA. Anaesthesia 2012; 67(4): 384-8

Following a short lecture and manikin training, novice airway users were randomly selected to insert either the LMA Supreme® or i-gel® into 80 patients undergoing breast surgery, to measure insertion success rate and ventilation profile.

Abstract text

Van Zundert TC, Brimacombe JR. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2012; 63(1): 35-41

Random allocation of 150 patients to either i-gel®, LMA ProSeal® or LMA Supreme® to compare, primarily, oropharyngeal leak pressure and changes in pressure between 30 and 60 minutes after insertion. Results in this case showed that there were no significant differences in leak pressure.

Abstract text

Halgawi A, Massicotte N, Lallo A, Gauthier A, Boudreault D, Ruel M, Girard F. Anesth Analg. 2012; 114(1): 152-156

160 patients were randomised for blind intubation via i-gel® or LMA Fastrach®. First attempt and overall success rates were recorded and time to intubation was measured.

Link to abstract.

Castle N, Pillay Y, Spencer N. Anaesthesia 2011; 66(11): 983-8

Six different supraglottic airway devices, including i-gel®, were tested by 58 paramedics for speed and ease of insertion in a manikin, whilst wearing either a standard uniform or chemical, biological, radiation, nuclear-person protective equipment (CBRN-PPE). During the latter test, i-gel® was the fastest of the six to insert with a mean insertion time of 19 seconds. Overall, the wearing of CBRN-PPE has a detrimental effect on insertion time of supraglottic airways.

Link to abstract.

Ruetzler K, Gruber C, Nabecker S, Wohlfarth P, Priemayr A, Frass M, Kimberger O, Sessler D, Roessler B. Resuscitation 2011; 82(8): 1060-1063

After an audio-visual lecture and practical demonstration, 40 voluntary emergency medical technicians with limited airway management experience were recruited to perform airway management with six devices, including the i-gel®, during sustained compressions on manikins. Hands-off time was significantly longer when inserting a traditional endotracheal tube, whereas the supraglottic devices were inserted successfully on each occasion.

Link to abstract.