i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

Lee JR, Kim MS, Kim JT, Byon HJ, Park YH, Kim HS, Kim CS. Anaesthesia 2012; 67(6): 606-611

99 children underwent genereal anaesthesia randomly via either i-gel® or cLMA. Leak pressure, ease of insertion, time taken to insert, fibreoptic examination and complications were all measured. There was no significant difference in leak pressure, however the i-gel® displayed a shorter insertion time and improved glottic view.

Link to abstract.

Corso RM, Piraccini E, Agnoletti V, Baccanelli M, Coffa A, Gambale G. Minerva Anaestesiol 2011; 77(8): 852-3

The i-gel® was used in eight patients for tracheostomy. Patients were extubated and the ET tube was replaced with the i-gel®. A percutaneous tracheostomy kit was then advanced to the second tracheal ring and the procedure was performed. Arterial pressure, PaO2/FiO2, minute ventilation and airway pressure were measured before, during and after tracheostomy. There were no significant differences in ventilatory and haemodynamic parameters. Use of the i-gel® was successful in seven of eight patients. The i-gel® provided better views of the glottis compared to the cLMA and ventilation was comparable to the ET tube. Large trials must take place to determine whether a one in eight failure rate remains.

Abstract text

Cook T, Howes B. CEACCP 2010; 11 (2): 56-61

This review article looks at the evidence for the efficacy of supraglottic airway devices. The authors use the cLMA as a standard for comparison. The ProSealTM, i-gel®, LMA Supreme® and LTS Mk. IITM are all discussed. Most of the i-gel® literature is positive and shows a high level of successful use. However, more clinical trials need to take place in order to confirm these findings.

Link to abstract.

Ali A, Sheikh NA, Ali L, Siddique SA. Professional Med J 2010; 17(4): 643-647

100 patients received ventilation via the i-gel® or cLMA during elective surgery. The devices were compared for ease of insertion, insertion time, number of airway manipulations needed and post-operative complications. The devices were generally comparable. More airway manipulations were required with the i-gel®, however this was not a statistically significant increase compared to the cLMA. The incidence of complications was very low, with one case of blood on an i-gel® and one incident of laryngospasm with each device.

Abstract text

Heuer JF, Stiller M, Rathgeber J, Eich C, Züchner K, Bauer M, Timmermann A. Anaesthesist 2009; 58(8): 813-820

In this study, the i-gel® was compared to the cLMA, ProSeal and Ambu Aura OnceTM supraglottic airways. 40 patients were assigned to each of the four groups for insertion of one of the airways during surgery. Ease of insertion and insertion time were comparable for all devices. The ProSeal and Aura OnceTM airways had significantly better placement and seal pressures. Airway morbidity did not occur in any of the groups. The cLMA was significantly more likely to cause postoperative sore throat.

Link to abstract