Comparison of Clinical Performance of I-GelTM with LMA-ProsealTM in Elective Surgeries

• Main Authors: Ishwar Singh, Monika Gupta, Mansi Tandon
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2009-01-01
• Series: Indian Journal of Anaesthesia
• Subjects: I-gel; LMA - ProSeal; Airway sealing pressure
• Online Access: http://www.ijaweb.org/article.asp?issn=0019-5049;year=2009;volume=53;issue=3;spage=302;epage=305;aulast=Singh

Sixty ASA grade I& II adult patients of either sex were randomly assigned into two groups .Group I (n=30) for I-gel and Group P (n=30) I′or LMA - ProSeal . We assessed the airway sealing pressure, ease of insertion, success rate of insertion, ease of gastric tube placement, airway trauma by post operative blood staining ofthe device, tongue, lip and dental trauma, hoarseness, regurgitation / aspiration and cost effectiveness. Although the airway sealing pressure was higher with Group P (29.6 cm H 2 O) than with Group I (25.27 cm H 2 0) (p < 0.05), but the airway sealing pressure of Group I was very well within the normal limit to prevent aspiration.The ease of insertion was more with Group I (29/30) than with Group P (25/30) (p < 0.05). The success rate of first attempt of insertion and ease of gastric tube placement was more with Group I (p> 0.05). Blood staining of the device& tongue, lip and dental trauma was more with Group P (p> 0.05). There was no evidence of bronchospasm, laryngospasm, regurgitation, aspiration or hoarseness in either group. To conclude I-gel is a novel supraglottic device with an acceptable airway sealing pressure (25.27 cm H 2 O). It is easier to insert, requires less attempts of insertion, has easier gastric tube placement and is less traumatic as compared to LMA-ProSeal.