i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

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

Comparison of blind intubation with different supraglottic airway devices by inexperienced physicians in several airway scenarios: a manikin study

Bielski A, Smereka J, Madziala M, Golik D, Szarpak L. Eur J Pediatr. 2019 Jun;178(6):871-882

This manikin study aimed to compare the performance of several supraglottic airway devices (SADs) in different blind intubation scenarios performed by 116 inexperienced physicians. The devices used included i-gel, Air-Q laryngeal airway and Ambu AuraGain. The three devices were tested on a paediatric manikin in three different scenarios, which included normal airway without chest compressions (A), normal airway with continuous chest compressions plus the CORPLUS CPR system (CCS) (B), and difficult airway with continuous chest compressions plus CCS (C). Parameters assessed in this investigation included first intubation success rate, median time to SAD placement, time to endotracheal intubation, as well as ease of intubation. Results have shown that the i-gel performed better in every scenario and in all parameters tested as compared to the other devices. Therefore, these data demonstrated that the i-gel is the most effective device for emergency blind intubation performed by inexperienced physicians in paediatric patients.

Link to abstract.

Are nurses able to perform blind intubation? Randomized comparison of I-gel and laryngeal mask airway

Ladny JR, Bielski K, Szarpak L, Cieciel M, Konski R, Smereka J. Am J Emerg Med. 2017 May; 35(5): 786-787

Manikin study to assess effectiveness of blind intubation through the i-gel, LMA Classic and a standard cuffed tracheal tube, performed by 34 nurses in CPR conditions across two scenarios (with and without chest compressions). Primary measure was time to intubation. i-gel recorded a lower median time to intubation and higher, statistically significant, successful insertion rates in both scenarios. Performing compressions doesn't significantly affect time to perform blind intubation in this setting, but reduces the effectiveness of first intubation attempt. i-gel was faster in both scenarios.

Link to abstract.

Tracheal intubation through I-gel performed during simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Wojewodzka-Zelezniakowicz M, Majer J. Am J Emerg Med. 2017 Jan 16.

Manikin study to compare the efficacy of ETI performed by 27 nurses using the i-gel as a guide with/without chest compressions. Results showed that in this scenario, nurses were able to perform blind intubation using the i-gel with 'high efficiency'.

Link to abstract.

Performance of intubation with 4 different airway devices by unskilled rescuers: manikin study

Lee DW, Kang MJ, Kim YH, Lee JH, Cho KW, Kim YW, Cho JH, Kim YS, Hong CK, Hwang SY. Am J Emerg Med. 2015 May;33(5):691-6

LMA Classic, i-gel, PENTAX Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscope were all tested, with time to ventilation, intubation success rate and difficulty of intubation measured. Authors conclude that intubation with i-gel was faster and easier.

Link to abstract

Simulation analysis of three intubating supraglottic devices during infant chest compression

Kohama H, Komasawa N, Ueki R, Kaminoh Y, Nishi S. Pediatr Int. 2015;57(1):180-2

Study on performance of air-Q, Ambu Aura-i and i-gel in a manikin simulation, undertaken by 22 novice physicians. Rate of success and insertion time with and without chest compressions were measured.

Link to abstract