Literature DB >> 24783088

i-gel™ in Ambulatory Surgery: A Comparison with LMA-ProSeal™ in Paralyzed Anaesthetized Patients.

Anjan Das1, Saikat Majumdar2, Anindya Mukherjee3, Tapobrata Mitra4, Ratul Kundu5, Bimal Kumar Hajra6, Dipankar Mukherjee6, Bibhukalyani Das7.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Supraglottic devices have mostly eliminated the need of hemodynamically stressful routine endotracheal intubation for ambulatory surgeries. We aimed to compare hemodynamics- like blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) alterations caused by stress response due to i-gel™ and LMA-ProSeal™ usage in Day care surgeries. Secondary outcomes included ease of insertion, time and number of attempts for the placement of devices.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2008 to July 2009, Sixty adult ASA I-II patients of either sex, aged 20-30, were randomly allocated into two groups (Group i-gel (n=30) receiving i-gel and Group PLMA (n=30) receiving LMA-ProSeal for airway maintenance) undergoing day care surgical procedures under general anaesthesia (GA).The ease of insertion and time taken for placement of device, postoperative complications were assessed. Haemodynamic parameters (HR, BP) were noted. It was a prospective, double blinded, and randomized controlled study. Parametric data were analyzed with the unpaired t-test and non-parametric data were analyzed with the Chi-square test. Unless otherwise stated, data are presented as mean (+ SD). p <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: Demographically both the groups were similar. i-gel was more easily inserted than LMA-ProSeal (90% vs. 83.33% respectively). i-gel insertion time was shorter than PLMA (14.9 vs. 20.0 sec respectively) and was statistically significant. Hemodynamics (HR, BP) were less altered in i-gel than PLMA and the results were statistically significant (p <0.05).
CONCLUSION: i-Gel; a relatively newer and cheap supraglottic device; insertion is easier and quicker as well as hemodynamically less stressful when compared with LMA-ProSeal in a day care setting.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ASA (American Society of Anaesthesiologists); Ambulatory (day care surgery); Blood pressure (BP) and Heart rate (HR); LMA—ProSeal™ (PLMA); i-gel™ (i-gel)

Year:  2014        PMID: 24783088      PMCID: PMC4003694          DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/7890.4113

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res        ISSN: 0973-709X


  28 in total

1.  Positive pressure ventilation with the ProSeal versus classic laryngeal mask airway: a randomized, crossover study of healthy female patients.

Authors:  J Brimacombe; C Keller; M Boehler; F Pühringer
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 5.108

Review 2.  Part 3: adult basic life support. European Resuscitation Council.

Authors: 
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2000-08-23       Impact factor: 5.262

3.  A randomised crossover trial comparing the i-gel supraglottic airway and classic laryngeal mask airway.

Authors:  C Janakiraman; D B Chethan; A R Wilkes; M R Stacey; N Goodwin
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 6.955

4.  Intraocular pressure and haemodynamic responses to insertion of the i-gel, laryngeal mask airway or endotracheal tube.

Authors:  Salah A Ismail; Neama A Bisher; Hazem W Kandil; Hany A Mowafi; Hayam A Atawia
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.330

5.  Scope and problems of day-care surgery in a plastic surgical unit.

Authors:  B C Jiburum; F C Akpuaka
Journal:  West Afr J Med       Date:  1996 Oct-Dec

Review 6.  Rising to the challenges of achieving day surgery targets.

Authors:  I Smith; T Cooke; I Jackson; R Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 6.955

7.  [A comparison of the single-use i-gel with the reusable laryngeal mask airway Proseal in anesthetized adult patients in Japanese population].

Authors:  Kentaro Hayashi; Akihiro Suzuki; Takayuki Kunisawa; Osamu Takahata; Yuzuru Yamasawa; Hiroshi Iwasaki
Journal:  Masui       Date:  2013-02

8.  [Ambulatory abortion, its advantages and economic effectiveness].

Authors:  V Ia Golota; T A Averina
Journal:  Akush Ginekol (Mosk)       Date:  1992-02

Review 9.  The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway.

Authors:  Joseph Brimacombe; Christian Keller
Journal:  Anesthesiol Clin North Am       Date:  2002-12

10.  Comparison of clinical performance of the I-gel with LMA proseal.

Authors:  Gaurav Chauhan; Pavan Nayar; Anita Seth; Kapil Gupta; Mamta Panwar; Nidhi Agrawal
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-01
View more
  10 in total

1.  In-flight cardiac arrest and in-flight cardiopulmonary resuscitation during commercial air travel: consensus statement and supplementary treatment guideline from the German Society of Aerospace Medicine (DGLRM).

Authors:  Jochen Hinkelbein; Lennert Böhm; Stefan Braunecker; Harald V Genzwürker; Steffen Kalina; Fabrizio Cirillo; Matthieu Komorowski; Andreas Hohn; Jörg Siedenburg; Michael Bernhard; Ilse Janicke; Christoph Adler; Stefanie Jansen; Eckard Glaser; Pawel Krawczyk; Mirko Miesen; Janusz Andres; Edoardo De Robertis; Christopher Neuhaus
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 3.397

2.  Comparison of the clinical performance of i-gel, LMA Supreme and LMA ProSeal in elective surgery.

Authors:  Geoffrey Haw Chieh Liew; Esther Dawen Yu; Shitalkumar Sharad Shah; Harikrishnan Kothandan
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.858

3.  Comparison of I-gel with Classic Laryngeal Mask Airway Regarding the Ease of Use and Clinical Performance.

Authors:  Dilek Erdoğan Arı; Arzu Yıldırım Ar; Ceren Şanlı Karip; İncifer Siyahkoç; Ahmet Hakan Arslan; Fatma Nur Akgün
Journal:  Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim       Date:  2015-08-21

Review 4.  Comparison of the i-gel and the laryngeal mask airway proseal during general anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sun Kyung Park; Geun Joo Choi; Yun Suk Choi; Eun Jin Ahn; Hyun Kang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-26       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  A randomised controlled trial comparing ProSeal laryngeal mask airway, i-gel and Laryngeal Tube Suction-D under general anaesthesia for elective surgical patients requiring controlled ventilation.

Authors:  Bikramjit Das; Rahul Varshney; Subhro Mitra
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2017-12

6.  Comparison of Two Supraglottic Airway Devices: I-gel Airway and ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway Following Digital Insertion in Nonparalyzed Anesthetized Patients.

Authors:  Ankur Luthra; Rajeev Chauhan; Amit Jain; Ishwar Bhukal; Shalvi Mahajan; Indu Bala
Journal:  Anesth Essays Res       Date:  2019-12-16

7.  Comparison of Proseal Laryngeal Mask Airway with the I-Gel Supraglottic Airway During the Bailey Manoeuvre in Adult Patients Undergoing Elective Surgery.

Authors:  Nishant Kalra; Akhilesh Gupta; Rajesh Sood; Mohandeep Kaur
Journal:  Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim       Date:  2020-11-30

Review 8.  [Cardiac arrest under special circumstances].

Authors:  Carsten Lott; Anatolij Truhlář; Anette Alfonzo; Alessandro Barelli; Violeta González-Salvado; Jochen Hinkelbein; Jerry P Nolan; Peter Paal; Gavin D Perkins; Karl-Christian Thies; Joyce Yeung; David A Zideman; Jasmeet Soar
Journal:  Notf Rett Med       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 0.826

Review 9.  Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and clinical performance of LMA ProSeal™ and i-gel® in adults: Meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Hye Won Shin; Hae Na Yoo; Go Eun Bae; Jun Chul Chang; Min Kyung Park; Hae Seun You; Hyun Jung Kim; Hyung Sik Ahn
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 1.671

10.  Optimal propofol dosage for i-gel® insertion in healthy paralyzed patients.

Authors:  Sung-Ae Cho; Tae-Yun Sung; Choon-Kyu Cho; Young Seok Jee; Po-Soon Kang
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2017-07-04
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.