Mishra SK, Sivaraman B, Balachander H, Naggapa M, Parida S, Bhat RR, Yuvaraj K. Anesth Essays Res. 2015 Sep-Dec;9(3):353-8
60 patients were enrolled to either i-gel or ProSeal groups, with the primary objective to compare sealing pressure. Authors conclude ProSeal gave a better seal.
Link to abstract
Mukadder S, Zekine B, Erdogan KG, Ulku O, Muharrem U, Saim Y, Mahmut D. ScientificWorldJournal. 2015;2015:634320
105 patients were randomly distributed between the three device groups. Initial leak pressure, insertion time, ease of placement and airway morbidity results all favoured the i-gel.
Link to abstract
Jeon WJ, Cho SY, Baek SJ, Kim KH. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2012; 63(6): 510-4
Adult patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopy were split into two groups of 30 and randomly assigned to either PLMA or i-gel®. Insertion time and number of attempts were recorded. After successful insertion in all patients in both groups, on first attempt, airway leak pressure was also measured. No significant difference in insertion time or leak pressure. Authors conclude that i-gel® is a reasonable alternative to PLMA in this scenario.
Siddiqui AS, Ahmed J, Siddiqui SZ, Haider S, Raza SA. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2012; 22(7): 419-23
An experimental study using i-gel® on 100 female patients undergoing elective gynaecologic surgery was performance-measured on ease of insertion, time to insert, peak airway pressure and leak pressure. A gastric tube was placed in each patient. Pharyngolaryngeal morbidities were also recorded. In 92% of patients, i-gel® was inserted successfully first time and there were no instances of blood on the device post-procedure. Authors confirm the i-gel® is a simple and easy to use device.