i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

Weber U, Oguz R, Potura LA, Kimberger O, Kober A, Tschernko E. Anaesthesia 2011; 66(6): 481-487

In this crossover study, 50 adult patients with BMI 25-35kg/m2 were assigned to ventilation with the i-gel® and the LMA Unique® in random order. Insertion attempts, difficulty (on a scale of 1-4), time to insertion and leak pressure were measured with each device. Leak pressure was higher with the i-gel®, with a mean value of 23.7cm H2O compared to 17.4cm H2O with the LMA Unique®. Within the study population, there was a bigger difference in leak pressures amongst patients with BMI >30. Insertion was generally comparable, although the i-gel® had a significantly shorter insertion time.

Abstract text

Teoh WH, Lee KM, Suhitharan T, Yahaya Z, Teo MM, Sia AT. Anaesthesia 2010; 65(12): 1173-1179

This study compared the i-gel® to the LMA Supreme® for the seal pressure during gynaecological laparoscopic surgery in the Trendelenburg position in 100 female patients. There was no difference in the oropharyngeal leak pressure with similar success rates for first time insertion and times to first capnograph trace. Both devices proved to be equally effective for gynaecological laparoscopic procedures.

Link to abstract

Gasteiger L, Brimacombe J, Perkhofer D, Kaufmann M, Keller C. Anaesthesia 2010; 65(9): 913-916

This study compared the use of the LMA Proseal® and the i-gel® in 152 adult female patients. A duodenal tube guided insertion technique was used for both devices. There was no significant difference between insertion success rates and insertion times of the two devices. Leak pressure was 7cm H2O higher with the ProSeal®, providing a better seal for ventilation.

Link to abstract

Amini S, Khoshfetrat M. Anaesthesia 2010; 65(8): 805-809

120 healthy adult patients were assigned to either the Solus® or i-gel® device for general anaesthesia. Airway quality measures, leak pressure, insertion time and complications were recorded. Both devices performed well and had low incidences of complications. The Solus® laryngeal mask required less airway manipulation, and provided better leak pressures and views of the vocal cords. i-gel® was quicker to insert.

Abstract text

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.

Abstract text