i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

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

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

Emergency airway management by paramedics: comparison between standard endotracheal intubation, laryngeal mask airway, and I-gel

Leventis C, Chalkias A, Sampanis MA, Foulidou X, Xanthos T. Eur J Emerg Med. 2014 Oct;21(5):371-3

72 briefly-trained paramedics were allocated to intubate a manikin. Success rate was higher, and insertion time 'significantly' shorter for the i-gel group.

Link to abstract

 

Emergency airway management by paramedics: comparison between standard endotracheal intubation, laryngeal mask airway, and I-gel

Leventis C, Chalkias A, Sampanis M A, Foulidou X, Xanthos T. Eur J Emerg Med. 2014 Oct; 21(5): 371-3

Study to investigate intubation skill levels of 72 paramedics using ETI, LMA and i-gel® in a manikin model. The success rate was higher, and the insertion time lower for those using i-gel®. There was a ‘statistically significant association’ between experience level and insertion time of LMA. Authors conclude that paramedics should ‘lay greater emphasis on airway management using supraglottic devices, especially i-gel®’.

Link to abstract

Supraglottic airway use by lifeguards

McKenna M, Davies M. Anaesthesia 2014; 69(8): 928

A response to the Adelborg et al study (Anaesthesia. 2014 Apr;69(4):343-7), questioning whether manikin simulation "adequately reproduces" the real-life anatomic difficulties experienced in drowning patients.

Link to abstract

A reply

Lofgren B, Adelborg K. Anaesthesia 2014; 69(8): 929-30

A response to the two concerns raised by McKenna (Anaesthesia 2014; 69(8): 928) and Baker (Anaesthesia 2014; 69(8): 928-9), acknowledging that more studies are needed and that there is currently “insufficient evidence” to recommend any specific ventilation technique among lifeguards. They also reiterate their study conclusions.

Link to abstract