i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

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

LMA ProSeal® vs. i-Gel® in ventilated children: A randomised, crossover study using the size 2 mask

Gasteiger L, Brimacombe J, Oswald E, Perkhofer D, Tonin A, Keller C, Tiefenthaler W. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2012; 56(10): 1321-1324

Fifty-one children aged 1.5-6 years, weighing 10-25kg, were studied randomly using either the size 2 LMA ProSeal® or i-gel®. The hypothesis tested was that oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic position of the airway tube differ between the two devices, with results proving similar.

Link to abstract.

Comparison of size 2.5 i-gelTM with proseal LMATM in anaesthetised, paralyzed children undergoing elective surgery

Mitra S, Das B, Jamil SN. North American Journal Of Medical Sciences 2012; 4(10): 453-7

Investigation on the usefulness of paediatric i-gel® size 2.5 against the PLMA equivalent in 60 randomly assigned patients due for anaesthetised elective surgery. Leak pressure was the primary outcome recorded, with further results for ease of insertion, hemodynamic data and postoperative complications also measured. Most areas offered no significant difference, although i-gel® proved easier to insert and recorded a higher leak pressure. Due to author-defined parameters such as cost-effectiveness, they deduce that i-gel® ‘must be more frequently used’.

Link to abstract.

A comparison of three supraglottic airway devices used by healthcare professionals during paediatric resuscitation simulation

Schunk D, Ritzka M, Graf B, Trabold B. Emerg Med J 2012; 0: 1–4

66 healthcare professionals of differing experience in paediatric airway management participated in a study comparing laryngeal masks, i-gel® and laryngeal tube. Separated into three groups and after brief training in each, the participants were asked to place the device. Positioning and time to insert were recorded. Results show that i-gel® is superior to both laryngeal mask and laryngeal tube under these circumstances.

Link to abstract.



A cohort evaluation of the paediatric i-gel® airway during anaesthesia in 120 children

Beringer R, Kelly F, Cook T, Nolan J, Hardy R, Simpson T, White M. Anaesthesia 2012; 66(12): 1121-1126

120 children up to 13 years of age were studied using the paediatric i-gel® during general anaesthesia to assess efficacy and usability. Insertion success and number of attempts, ventilation, leak pressure and fibreoptic view were all recorded. Airway manipulations and complications were also noted. In 94% of children the i-gel® was inserted and a clear airway maintained without complication.

Link to abstract.

A clinical evaluation of the I-gel™ supraglottic airway device in children

Hughes C, Place K, Berg S, Mason D. Pediatr Anaesth 2012; 22(8): 765-71

Over a 12-month period, 154 children were studied using i-gel® sizes ranging from 1 to 2.5 to assess the device based on successful rates of insertion, airway leak pressure, position confirmed by fibreoptic laryngoscopy, gastric tube placement, manipulations required, and complications. First insertion attempt was 93.5%, and complications arose in 20% of cases. Most were minor, however reports suggest there were cases of displacement and flexion compromising airway quality. Authors confirm ‘vigilance’ had to be used to secure the device, and that a decision on whether the higher cost for i-gel® is worth it depends on further studies of this kind.

Link to abstract.