i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

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

Comparison of supraglottic devices i-gel(®) and LMA Fastrach(®) as conduit for endotracheal intubation

Kapoor S, Jethava DD, Gupta P, Jethava D, Kumar A. Indian J Anaesth. 2014 Jul;58(4):397-402.

Two randomised groups were assigned either device and after insertion, blind tracheal intubation was attempted. Success at first attempt and overall intubation success rates were assessed. Authors concluded that the i-gel is 'a better device' for rescue ventilation.

Link to abstract.

A comparison of surfactant administration through i-gel and ET-tube in the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome in newborns weighing more than 2000 grams.

Sadeghnia A, Tanhaei M, Mohammadizadeh M, Nemati M. Adv Biomed Res. 2014 Jul 31;3:160

Randomised control trial on newborns with respiratory distress syndrome, comparing administration of surfactant. Results show that administration using i-gel was more successful than control group and 'could even be promoted to standard care position'. More research needed.

Link to abstract

The LMA-Supreme versus the I-gel in simulated difficult airway in children: a randomised study

Kus A, Gok CN, Hosten T, Gurkan Y, Solak M, Toker K. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2014 May;31(5):280-4

In this double-blind study, the scenario was made more difficult by using a cervical collar. Primary aim was to compare leak pressures between devices, with success rate, insertion and fibreoptic view other parameters measured. First attempt success and leak pressure was higher with LMA Supreme. Both devices proved effective, and differences may not be clinically significant.

Link to abstract

Higher insertion success with the i-gel supraglottic airway in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomised controlled trial

Middleton PM, Simpson PM, Thomas RE, Bendall JC. Resuscitation 2014;85(7):893-7

Subjects with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were allocated to either the i-gel or Portex Soft Seal laryngeal mask group, within a large Australian ambulance group. Primary outcome was successful insertion of the airway. The i-gel had a significantly higher success rate than Portex Soft Seal and significantly lower median ease of insertion scores.

Link to abstract

A randomised crossover comparison of manikin ventilation through Soft Seal®, i-gelTM and AuraOnceTM supraglottic airway devices by surf lifeguards

Adelborg K, Al-Mashhadi RH, Nielsen LH, Dalgas C, Mortensen MB and Løfgren B. Anaesthesia. 2014 Apr; 69(4): 343-7

Forty lifeguards took part in this manikin study, where time to ventilation and proportion of successful ventilations (both with and without ‘concurrent’ chest compressions) were measured. Mean time to ventilate with i-gel® was 15.6 seconds, compared to 35.2 for Soft Seal and 35.1 for AuraOnce. Authors concluded that ‘most lifeguards preferred the i-gel®’.

Link to abstract