i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

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

Comparison of Four Different Supraglottic Airway Devices in Terms of Efficacy, Intra-ocular Pressure and Haemodynamic Parameters in Children Undergoing Ophthalmic Surgery

Peker G, Takmaz SA, Baltacı B, Başar H, Kotanoğlu M. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2015 Oct;43(5):304-12

Prospective, randomised study on 60 children aged 1-10 years. Insertion attempts and ease, leak pressure and complications were recorded. Results suggest no difference between the devices under these conditions.

Link to abstract

Small is the new big: An overview of newer supraglottic airways for children

Goyal R. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2015 Oct-Dec;31(4):440-9

Overview of currently available options in paediatric sizes, suitability of each, published data and general concerns regarding their use.

Link to abstract

Comparison of Second-Generation Supraglottic Airway Devices (i-gel versus LMA ProSeal) During Elective Surgery in Children

Sanket B, Ramavakoda CY,Nishtala MR, Ravishankar CK, Ganigara A. AANA J. 2015 Aug;83(4):275-80

Study to compare efficacy of each device on patients aged up to 10 years. Ease of insertion, time to insertion and oropharyngeal leak pressure were some of the measurements taken. Insertion time was significantly faster with i-gel.

Link to abstract

A randomized comparison between the i-gel™ and the air-Q™ supraglottic airways when used by anesthesiology trainees as conduits for tracheal intubation in children

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

A randomized comparison of the i-gel with the self-pressurized air-Q intubating laryngeal airway in children

Kim MS, Lee JH, Han SW, Im YJ, Kang HJ, Lee JR. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015 Apr;25(4):405-12

Eighty children were split between each device group, with leak pressure and fibreoptic view assessed at three intervals. i-gel was 'significantly easier' to insert and had high pressures at all measurement points.

Link to abstract