i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

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

Comparison of I-gel for general anesthesia in obese and nonobese patients

Prabha R, Raman R, Parvez Khan M, Kaushal D, Siddiqui A, and
Abbas H. Saudi J Anaesth. 2018 Oct-Dec; 12(4): 535–539

This prospective controlled study aimed to examine the clinical performance of the i-gel in both obese and non-obese patients. 32 patients were divided into two groups, group O (BMI >30 kg/m2) and group C (BMI between 18.5 and 29.9 kg/m2). A range of parameters were evaluated including OLP (primary outcome), leak fraction, time taken to insert the device, ease of insertion, fiberoptic glottis view and adverse events. Results have demonstrated that OLP was marginally higher in Group O in comparison to group C (but not statistically different). In regards to the other parameters and side effects, these were comparable in both groups. Therefore, the i-gel provides an effective tool for the airway management of both obese and non-obese patients.

Link to abstract

Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures. A randomized controlled trial

Alzahem AM, Aqil M, Alzahrani TA, Aljazaeri AH. Saudi Med J. 2017 May;38(5):482-490

Randomised assignment of 112 patients to either AuraOnce or i-gel groups in which oropharyngeal leak pressure, ease of insertion and fibreoptic viewing were measured. i-gel recorded more favourable leak pressures and superior fibreoptic viewing.

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

Performance of the i-gel™ during pre-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Häske D, Schempf B, Gaier G, Niederberger C. Resuscitation 2013; 84(9): 1229-32

This observational study of i-gel® use during CPR assessed ease of insertion, ventilation quality, leak and whether ventilation was possible without chest compression interruption. Insertions were attempted by 63 paramedics and seven emergency physicians in pre-hospital CPR, with an overall 90% first-attempt insertion success rate. Insertion was reported as easy in 80% of cases, with the same figure representing cases with no leak recorded. In 74% of cases, continuous chest compression was still possible. The authors say that, ‘the i-gel is an easy supraglottic device to insert and enables adequate ventilation during CPR’.

Link to abstract