Comparison of the i-gelTM and the Laryngeal Mask Airway ClassicTM in terms of clinical performance

• Main Authors: Reyhan Polat, Gözde Bumin Aydin, Jülide Ergil, Murat Sayin, Tuğba Kokulu, Ibrahim Öztürk
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia 2015-10-01
• Series: Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia
• Subjects: Máscara laríngea clássica; i-gel; Dispositivos supraglóticos
• Online Access: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-70942015000500343&lng=en&tlng=en

ABSTRACTPURPOSE: The i-gelTM is one of the second generation supraglottic airway devices. Our study was designed to compare the i-gel and the Laryngeal Mask Airway ClassicTM with respect to the clinical performance.METHODS: We compared the performance of the i-gel with that of the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic in 120 patients undergoing urologic surgery during general anesthesia without muscle relaxant with respect to the number of attempts for successful insertion, insertion time, peak airway pressure, incidence of regurgitation, fiberoptic glottic view and postoperative complications. Second generation supraglottic airway devices were inserted by the same anesthesiologist, experienced in use of both devices (>200 uses and first time failure rate <5%). Methylene blue method was used to detect gastric regurgitation.RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the two groups regarding the success of insertion of second generation supraglottic airway device (p = 0.951). The laryngeal mask insertion time for the i-gel group was significantly shorter than that for the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic group (11.6 ± 2.4 s versus 13.1 ± 1.8 s [p = 0.001]). The fiberoptic glottic view scores for the i-gel group was significantly better than that for the ones for the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic group (p = 0.001). On fiberoptic view, there was no sign of methylene blue dye at any time point in either group. In addition, there was no difference between the groups in patient response regarding the presence of a sore throat when questioned 24 h after the procedure (p = 0.752).CONCLUSION: Both devices had good performance with low postoperative complications and without occurrence of regurgitation. The i-gel provided a shorter insertion time and a better fiberoptic view than the Laryngeal Mask Airway Classic.