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

被引:5
作者
Ari, Dilek Erdogan [1 ]
Ar, Arzu Yildirim [1 ]
Karip, Ceren Sanli [1 ]
Siyahkoc, Incifer [2 ]
Arslan, Ahmet Hakan [1 ]
Akgun, Fatma Nur [1 ]
机构
[1] Fatih Sultan Mehmet Training & Res Hosp, Clin Anaesthesiol & Reanimat, Istanbul, Turkey
[2] Sanliurfa Mehmet Akif Inan Training & Res Hosp, Clin Anaesthesiol & Reanimat, Sanliurfa, Turkey
关键词
Airway; I-gel; laryngeal mask airway;
D O I
10.5152/TJAR.2015.71542
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Objective: I-gel is a new supraglottic airway device without an inflatable cuff. We aimed to compare I-gel and the classic laryngeal mask airway (LMA) regarding the ease of use and clinical performance in Turkish population. Methods: Fifty American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II patients were randomly allocated into two groups: Group I-gel and Group LMA. Insertion time and success in first attempt were recorded. Peak, plato and mean airway pressures, EtCO 2, airway compliance and leak volume were periodically recorded during the operation. The presence of blood on device removal and postoperative sore throat were also assessed. Results: The device insertion time in Group I-gel was shorter than that in Group LMA (21.00 +/- 4.15 vs. 30.40 +/- 12.17 s, p=0.001). The success rate in first attempt, peak, plato and mean airway pressures, EtCO 2 and airway compliance did not differ between the groups. The leak volume was lower in Group I-gel 5 and 45 min after insertion (p=0.041 and p=0.027). The presence of blood on device removal and postoperative sore throat were similar in both groups. Conclusion: I-gel may be a more advantageous supraglottic airway device compared with LMA.
引用
收藏
页码:299 / 303
页数:5
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
Agnoletti V, 2013, MINERVA ANESTESIOL, V79, P107
[2]  
Chauhan Gaurav, 2013, J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol, V29, P56, DOI 10.4103/0970-9185.105798
[3]   A Comparison of the Performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™ during Anesthesia: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials [J].
Chen, Xiaoguang ;
Jiao, Jinghua ;
Cong, Xuefeng ;
Liu, Lei ;
Wu, Xiaomei .
PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (08)
[4]  
Corso Ruggero M, 2014, J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol, V30, P288, DOI 10.4103/0970-9185.130115
[5]   i-gel (TM) in Ambulatory Surgery: A Comparison with LMA-ProSeal (TM) in Paralyzed Anaesthetized Patients [J].
Das, Anjan ;
Majumdar, Saikat ;
Mukherjef, Anindya ;
Mitra, Tapobrata ;
Kundu, Ratul ;
Hajra, Bimal Kumar ;
Mukherjef, Dipankar ;
Das, Bibhukalyani .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH, 2014, 8 (03) :80-84
[6]   Evaluation of the size 4 i-gel™ airway in one hundred non-paralysed patients [J].
Gatward, J. J. ;
Cook, T. M. ;
Seller, C. ;
Handel, J. ;
Simpson, T. ;
Vanek, V. ;
Kelly, F. .
ANAESTHESIA, 2008, 63 (10) :1124-1130
[7]  
Hayashi Kentaro, 2013, Masui, V62, P134
[8]   Comparison of the Proseal LMA and intersurgical I-gel during gynecological laparoscopy [J].
Jeon, Woo Jae ;
Cho, Sang Yun ;
Baek, Seong Jin ;
Kim, Kyoung Hun .
KOREAN JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2012, 63 (06) :510-514
[9]   Application of PEEP using the i-gel during volume-controlled ventilation in anesthetized, paralyzed patients [J].
Kim, Yong Beom ;
Chang, Young Jin ;
Jung, Wol Seon ;
Byen, Sang Ho ;
Jo, Youn Yi .
JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA, 2013, 27 (06) :827-831
[10]  
Kini Gurudas, 2014, J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol, V30, P183, DOI 10.4103/0970-9185.130008