i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

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

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

Kim MS, Oh JT, Min JY, Lee KH, Lee JR. Anaesthesia. 2014 Apr;69(4):362-7

54 infants were allocated with success rate at first attempt and fibreoptic views measured. First-attempt success was 100% for i-gel, compared to 69 in LMA.

Link to abstract

Corso RM, Battelli D, Maitan S, Zampone S, Agnoletti V. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2014 Apr;30(2):288-90

Database review of 45 patient records meeting authors' set criteria, which included i-gel sizes 1-2.5. i-gel use in MRI produces no artefacts and the authors conclude the device is a useful device in this scenario, offering quick insertion time and low rate of complications.

Link to abstract

Lee JH, Cho HS, Shin WJ, Yang HS. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2014 Feb;66(2):127-30.

Airway sealing ability, success rate of insertion and adverse events were among the recorded outcomes in this study. Leak pressures and insertion success rates are similar between the two devices, however the i-gel slid out of the mouth of a small amount of patients in this scenario. Authors recommend the device should be secured more tightly.

Link to abstract.