Jagannathan N, Sohn L, Ramsey M, Huang A, Sawardekar A, Sequera-Ramos L, Kromrey L, De Oliveira GS. Can J Anaesth. 2015 Jun;62(6):587-94
96 children aged one month to six years were randomised into either i-gel or air-Q groups, with time to successful tracheal intubation the primary end point. Both served as effective conduit devices in this scenario.
Link to abstract
ce3f4a5a-b834-4d63-b899-e82ec7616a64|1|3.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Jang YE, Kim YC, Yoon HK, Jeon YT, Hwang JW, Kim E, Park HP. J Anesth. 2015 Jun;29(3):338-45
37 patients were randomly allocated to either a dexmedetomidine or control (saline) group. Authors conclude that preoperative dexmedetomidine reduced the EC50 of propofol.
Link to abstract
8b89a21c-4d79-4acf-af8c-a36320c0c2d1|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
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
Tags :
2015,
Lee DW,
Am J Emerg Med,
RCT,
Manikin study,
Trainees,
Unskilled,
Prehospital emergency care,
Prehospital CPR,
CPR,
Chest compressions,
vs LMA,
vs PENTAX Airway Scope,
vs Macintosh laryngoscope
4afac83d-55bc-458f-9ca1-3b9bf8eedee7|1|4.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Jadhav PA, Dalvi NP, Tendolkar BA. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2015 Apr-Jun;31(2):221-5
Ease and time to insertion, airway sealing pressure and adverse events were measured in this study of 60 patients randomly allocated to i-gel and ProSeal groups. i-gel proved easier to insert and less traumatic.
Link to abstract
7706674b-64bc-4f78-9c51-a8bbe2f09c63|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Beleña JM, Núñez M, Vidal A, Gasco C, Alcojor A, Lee P, Pérez JL. Anaesthesist. 2015 Apr;64(4):271-6
140 patients split into two groups: i-gel and LMA Supreme, with insertion time, success rate and leak pressure among the results measured. i-gel was quicker to insert but deemed not as easy. No differences were found in leak pressure.
Link to abstract
dd516f42-604d-4ee4-b9a9-c437f408efea|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c