Comparison of I-gel and laryngeal mask airway classic in terms of ease of insertion and hemodynamic response: a randomised observational study

Anupriya Sahaya; R. K. Singh; Nikita Baser; Shilpa Sharda

doi:10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20232101

Authors

Anupriya Sahaya Department of Anesthesiology, Pacific Medical College and Hospital, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India
R. K. Singh Department of Anesthesiology, Pacific Medical College and Hospital, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India
Nikita Baser Department of Anesthesiology, Pacific Medical College and Hospital, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India
Shilpa Sharda Department of Anesthesiology, Pacific Medical College and Hospital, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20232101

Keywords:

SADs, Tracheal intubation, General anaesthesia, C-LMA, I-Gel

Abstract

Background: The gold standard technique for preserving a patent airway throughout anaesthesia is tracheal intubation. I-gel is a relatively new addition to the SADs. I-gel has combined the concept of the non-cuffed SADs like the SLIPA and gastric tube of the proseal LMA yet retaining the shape of laryngeal mask. Hence, we have compared ease of insertion, number and duration of insertion attempts among the two devices.

Methods: This study was conducted on patients undergoing elective surgery under GA in Pacific Medical College and Hospital, Udaipur. Patients were divided into two groups: group A= LMA classic, a variant of supraglottic airway device and group B= I-gel, a variant of supraglottic airway device. The two devices were than compared with respect to success rate of insertion, time taken for insertion and ease of gastric tube placement (number of attempts) and post-operative airway morbidity.

Results: Mean insertion time was 8.66±3.21 seconds in C-LMA and 6.49±1.92 seconds in I-gel (p<0.001). 97.14% was the success rate of single time attempt insertion with I-gel as compared to 88.57% in C-LMA. There was a failure rate of 11.43% in single attempt insertion with CLMA as compared to 2.86% with I-gel (p>0.05).

Conclusions: We hereby concluded with our study that successful and shorter duration of insertion, with less hemodynamic response, makes I-gel™ a suitable alternative to LMA classic™ during general anesthesia.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Janakiraman C, Chethan DB, Wilkes AR, Stacey MR, Goodwin N. A randomised crossover trial comparing the I-gel supraglottic airway and classic laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia. 2009;64(6):674-8.

Singh I, Gupta M, Tandon M. Comparison of clinical performance of I-gel with LMA-proseal in elective surgeries. Indian J Anaesth. 2009;53(3):302-5.

Stroumpoulis K, Isaia C, Bassiakou E, Pantazopoulos I, Troupis G, Mazarakis A, et al. A comparison of the I-gel and classic LMA insertion in manikins by experienced and novice physicians. Eur J Emerg Med. 2012;19(1):24-7.

Gupta V, Mehta N, Gupta S, Mahotra K, Comparative evaluation of supraglottic airway devices I-gel versus LMA-supreme in patients undergoing surgery under general anaesthesia. Indian J Clin Anaesth. 2015;2(2):86-91.

Alex S, Varghese BS, Ramadas CK, Krishnan V. Comparison of insertion characteristics of I-gel and classic LMA by first time users. Ann Int Med Dent Res. 2017;3(3):AN45-8.

Ekinci O, Abitagaoglu S, Turan G, Sivrikaya Z, Bosna G, Özgultekin A. The comparison of ProSeal and I-gel laryngeal mask airways in anesthetized adult patients under controlled ventilation. Saudi Med J. 2015;36(4):432-6.

Polat R, Aydin GB, Ergil J, Sayin M, Kokulu T, Qzturk I. A comparative study between I-gel and classical laryngeal mask airway in elective surgery under general anaesthesia. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2015;65(5):343-8.

Pratheeba N, Ramya GS, Ranjan RV, Remadevi R. Comparison of i-gel™ and laryngeal mask airway Classic™ in terms of ease of insertion and hemodynamic response: A randomized observational study. Anesth Essays Res. 2016;10(3):521-525.

Jacob L, Mathew J. A comparative study on the performance between I-gel® and classic laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized spontaneously breathing patients. Indian J Clin Anaesth. 2021;8(3):465.

Dhimar A, Sangada BR, Upadhyay MR, Patel SH. I-gel versus laryngeal mask airway (LMA) classic as a conduit for tracheal intubation using ventilating bougie. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2017;33:467-72.

Helmy AM, Atef HM, EI-Taher EM, Henidak AM. Comparative study between I-gel, a new supraglottic airway device and classical laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized spontaneously ventilated patients. Saudi J Anaesth. 2010;4:131-6.

Reza Hashemian SM, Nouraei N, Razavi SS, Zaker E, Jafari A, Eftekhari P, et al. Comparison of I-gel™ and laryngeal mask airway in anesthetized paralyzed patients. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci. 2014;4:288-92.

Chauhan G, Nayar P, Seth A, Gupta K, Panwar M, Agrawal N. Comparison of clinical performance of the I-gel with LMA proseal novice physician. Eur J of Emerg Med. 2011;19(1):24-7.

Durrani HD, Butt KJ, Sadaf S, Rehan A, Khan AM, Umar A. Comparison of LMA classic and I-gel in anesthetized, spontaneously breathing patients during elective surgical procedures. Anaesth Pain Inten Car. 2013;17:274-8.

Theiler LG, Kleine-Brueggeney M, Kaiser D, Urwyler N, Luyet C, Vogt A, et al. Crossover comparison of the laryngeal mask supreme and the i-gel in simulated difficult airway scenario in anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology. 2009;111:55-62.

Kalra N, Gupta A, Sood R, Kaur M. Comparison of proseal laryngeal mask airway with the I-gel supraglottic airway during the bailey manoeuvre in adult patients undergoing elective surgery. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2021;49(2):107-13.