i-gel® from Intersurgical: clinical evidence listing

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

Emergency airway management by paramedics: comparison between standard endotracheal intubation, laryngeal mask airway, and I-gel

Leventis C, Chalkias A, Sampanis MA, Foulidou X, Xanthos T. Eur J Emerg Med. 2014 Oct;21(5):371-3

72 briefly-trained paramedics were allocated to intubate a manikin. Success rate was higher, and insertion time 'significantly' shorter for the i-gel group.

Link to abstract

 

Evaluation of chest compression effect on airway management with air-Q, aura-i, i-gel, and Fastrack intubating supraglottic devices by novice physicians: a randomized crossover simulation study

Komasawa N, Ueki R, Kaminoh Y, Nishi S. J Anesth. 2014 Oct;28(5):676-80

Insertion time and successful ventilation rate were measured, with the latter unaffected by chest compression. 

Link to abstract

Supraglottic airway use by lifeguards

McKenna M, Davies M. Anaesthesia 2014; 69(8): 928

A response to the Adelborg et al study (Anaesthesia. 2014 Apr;69(4):343-7), questioning whether manikin simulation "adequately reproduces" the real-life anatomic difficulties experienced in drowning patients.

Link to abstract

A reply

Lofgren B, Adelborg K. Anaesthesia 2014; 69(8): 929-30

A response to the two concerns raised by McKenna (Anaesthesia 2014; 69(8): 928) and Baker (Anaesthesia 2014; 69(8): 928-9), acknowledging that more studies are needed and that there is currently “insufficient evidence” to recommend any specific ventilation technique among lifeguards. They also reiterate their study conclusions.

Link to abstract

Should supraglottic airway devices be used by lifeguards at all?

Baker P, Webber J. Anaesthesia 2014; 69(8): 928-9

A further response to Adelborg et al (Anaesthesia. 2014 Apr;69(4):343-7), expressing concern at this being a manikin study, and suggesting that the “vital issue” is whether a device is “fit for purpose” in the case of a drowning patient.

Link to abstract