BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The I-gel is a new single-use supraglottic airway device without an inflatable cuff. This study was designed to investigate the usefulness of the I-gel compared with the classic laryngeal mask airway (cLMA) and ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (pLMA) in anaesthetized, paralysed patients. METHODS: The American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II patients (n = 167) scheduled for orthopaedic surgery were included in this prospective study. General anaesthesia was achieved with intravenous infusion of propofol, remifentanil and rocuronium. The patients were randomly assigned to I-gel, pLMA and cLMA groups (64, 53 and 50 patients, respectively). Properly sized I-gel (No. 3-4) or LMA (No. 4-5) was inserted. We assessed haemodynamic data, airway leak pressure, leak volume, success rates and postoperative complications. RESULTS: There were no differences in the demographic data and haemodynamic data immediately after insertion of devices among the three groups. The airway leak pressures of the I-gel group (27.1 +/- 6.4 cmH2O) and pLMA group (29.8 +/- 5.7 cmH2O) were significantly higher than that of the cLMA group (24.7 +/- 6.2 cmH2O). The success rates for first attempt of insertion were similar among the three groups (P = 0.670). There were no differences in the incidence of adverse events except for the larger incidence of sore throat in the cLMA group. CONCLUSION: I-gel may have a similar airway sealing to that of pLMA, higher than that of cLMA, and is not associated with adverse events. The I-gel might be an effective alternative as a supraglottic airway device.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The I-gel is a new single-use supraglottic airway device without an inflatable cuff. This study was designed to investigate the usefulness of the I-gel compared with the classic laryngeal mask airway (cLMA) and ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (pLMA) in anaesthetized, paralysed patients. METHODS: The American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II patients (n = 167) scheduled for orthopaedic surgery were included in this prospective study. General anaesthesia was achieved with intravenous infusion of propofol, remifentanil and rocuronium. The patients were randomly assigned to I-gel, pLMA and cLMA groups (64, 53 and 50 patients, respectively). Properly sized I-gel (No. 3-4) or LMA (No. 4-5) was inserted. We assessed haemodynamic data, airway leak pressure, leak volume, success rates and postoperative complications. RESULTS: There were no differences in the demographic data and haemodynamic data immediately after insertion of devices among the three groups. The airway leak pressures of the I-gel group (27.1 +/- 6.4 cmH2O) and pLMA group (29.8 +/- 5.7 cmH2O) were significantly higher than that of the cLMA group (24.7 +/- 6.2 cmH2O). The success rates for first attempt of insertion were similar among the three groups (P = 0.670). There were no differences in the incidence of adverse events except for the larger incidence of sore throat in the cLMA group. CONCLUSION: I-gel may have a similar airway sealing to that of pLMA, higher than that of cLMA, and is not associated with adverse events. The I-gel might be an effective alternative as a supraglottic airway device.