scholarly journals Analysis of ease of insertions, its attempts and time taken to insert for i-gel and cLMA in paediatric cases.

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-101
Author(s):  
Dr. Nimish Jain ◽  
◽  
Dr. Susheela Taxak ◽  
Dr. Karampal Singh ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Anaesthesia ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Airway Device ◽  
Blind Study ◽  
Supraglottic Airway ◽  
Supraglottic Airway Device ◽  
Physical Status ◽  
Aim Analysis ◽  
American Society ◽  
Single Blind

Aim: Analysis of ease of insertions, its attempts and time taken to insert for i-gel and cLMA inpaediatric cases. Methods: We did a prospective, randomised single-blind study on Eighty patientsof either sex belonging to American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status class I or II,between 6 months to 8 years of age, scheduled to undergo elective surgery for less than one andhalf hour duration under general anaesthesia. In this study we analysed the ease of insertion,attempts and time were taken to insert the supraglottic airway device. Results: The ease ofinsertion observed was easy in 39(97.5%) in the i-gel group and 35(87.5%) in cLMA group in ourstudy. The i-gel was placed successfully in 39 out of 40 (97.5%) patients in the first attempt, andachieved 100% insertion on the second attempt. Correct positioning of cLMA in the first attempt wasseen in 35 out of 40 (87.5%) patients. The remaining 5 patients (12.5%) required a secondattempt. The average insertion time of cLMA (12.88 ± 1.771 seconds) was longer than the averagetime of insertion of i-gel (9.48 ± 1.037 seconds), and these differences were highly significantstatistically (p= 0.000). Conclusion: To conclude, i-gel and cLMA is effective and safe devices foruse in children. Both are easy to insert and have insignificant morbidity, however, time taken andattempts of insertions for i-gel was lesser than cLMA. Also, the ease of insertion was relatively easyfor i-gel than cLMA in pediatric cases.

Comparative study of two supraglottic airway devices- LMA Supreme and I-Gel in adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia at a tertiary hospital

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 141-145
Author(s):  
Shaikh Noorulhaque Mohammad Shafi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
General Anaesthesia ◽  
Airway Device ◽  
Supraglottic Airway ◽  
Supraglottic Airway Device ◽  
Hemodynamic Changes ◽  
Dental Injury ◽  
Group I ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Lma Supreme

Background: The LMA Supreme is a supraglottic airway device made of medical grade PVC and is latex-free. The I-Gel is a new supraglottic airway device with a non-inflatable cuff, composed of soft gel like, transparent thermoplastic elastomer. The main aim of present study was to compare the LMA Supreme with the I-Gel LMA in terms of the success of insertion of the device, hemodynamic changes and postoperative device related complications. Material and Methods: Present study was a prospective, randomized, comparative, observational study conducted in patients admitted for various elective surgeries, were randomly divided (by envelope selection) as I-Gel LMA and Supreme LMA insertion for general anaesthesia. Results: The mean age in group I and S were 41.26 ± 10.22 and 44.86 ± 10.1 years respectively. The mean body weight in Group I was 55.51 ± 9.61 kgs and in Group S it was 53.12 ± 9.65 kgs. There was no significant difference in the age, gender, body weight, ASA Grades of the patients between Group 1 and Group 2 .Statistically there was no significant difference in the SAD Sizes, Surgical Procedures, ease of insertion in both the groups. The basal heart rate was, mean SBP, mean basal DBP, mean basal MAP and mean SpO2 were comparable in both groups. Blood Tinged SAD was noted in 6 patients in both group I (I-Gel) and group S (SLMA). None of the patients in group I (I-Gel) out of 43 patients had Lip or Dental Injury, whereas 2 patients in group S (SLMA) out of 43 patients had Lip or Dental Injury. Only 4 of the patients in group I (I-Gel) out of 43 patients had Sore Throat within 24 hours post removal of SAD, whereas 6 patients in group S (SLMA) out of 43 patients had Sore Throat within 24 hours post removal of SAD. Conclusion: Both LMA Supreme and I-Gel can be used effectively and comfortably in selected adult patients during general anaesthesia. Both LMA Supreme and I-Gel are easy to insert, both are almost inserted in first attempt, no significant difference in hemodynamic changes during usage is noted.

scholarly journals Comparison of the Disposable Streamlined Liner of the Pharynx Airway and the Disposable I-gel in Anaesthetized, Paralyzed Adults: A Randomized Prospective Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khaled EL-Radaideh ◽  
Ala"a Alhowary ◽  
Diab Bani Hani
Keyword(s):  
Airway Device ◽  
Insertion Time ◽  
Supraglottic Airway ◽  
Supraglottic Airway Device ◽  
Hemodynamic Stability ◽  
Arterial Blood ◽  
Single Use ◽  
Sealing Pressure ◽  
End Tidal ◽  
Single Blind

Introduction. This study compared streamlined liner of the pharynx airway (SLIPA) and I-gel noninflatable, single-use, supraglottic airway device (SAD) performance in anesthetized, paralyzed adults.Methods. Eighty adults (ASA physical statuses I–III) who were undergoing elective procedures under general anesthesia with an SAD were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, single-blind study. Subjects were randomly and evenly assigned to the SLIPA or I-gel group for intraoperative airway management. Ease and number of insertions, insertion time, oropharyngeal sealing pressure, hemodynamic response, oxygen saturation (SpO2), end-tidal CO2(EtCO2), and peri- and postoperative complications were examined.Results. The SLIPA and I-gel devices were successfully inserted in 100% and 95% of subjects, respectively. In two I-gel subjects (5%), ventilation was not possible after two attempts, but a size 55 SLIPA was successfully inserted in both cases. Forty-two and 38 patients were ultimately included in the SLIPA and I-gel groups, respectively. Insertion time was significantly shorter with the SLIPA (11.19±3.03 s) than with the I-gel (15.05±6.37 s,P=0.003). Oropharyngeal sealing pressure was significantly higher in SLIPA (28.76±3.11 cmH2O) than in I-gel (25.9±3.65 cmH2O) subjects (P=0.001). Blood staining occurred more frequently in SLIPA (n=8, 19.0%) than in I-gel (n=5, 13.2%) patients (P<0.01). Heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure, SpO2, and EtCO2were not significantly different between groups.Conclusion. Although blood staining incidence was higher, SLIPA insertion was easier and faster than I-gel insertion. The SLIPA provided better airway sealing pressure. Both devices had similar mechanical ventilation and oxygenation characteristics and comparable hemodynamic stability. Both noninflatable SADs are useful, but SLIPA rapid insertion and good airway sealing make it an effective alternative to the I-gel.

scholarly journals The evaluation of the insertion parameters and complications of the i-gel Plus airway device for maintaining patent airway during planned procedures under general anaesthesia: a protocol for a prospective multi-center cohort study.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavel Michalek ◽  
Olga Klementova ◽  
Taranpreet Kaur Bhoday ◽  
Jakub Werner ◽  
Ana Lopez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
General Anaesthesia ◽  
Airway Device ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Supraglottic Airway ◽  
Military Hospital ◽  
Supraglottic Airway Device ◽  
Supraglottic Airway Devices

Introduction: Supraglottic airway devices represent a less invasive method of airway management than tracheal intubation during general anaesthesia. Their continued development is focused mainly on improvements in the insertion success rate and minimalization of perioperative and postoperative complications. The i-gel Plus is a novel, anatomically preshaped supraglottic airway device which achieves a perilaryngeal seal due to a non-inflatable cuff made of a soft thermoplastic elastomer. The purpose of this trial is to assess the success rate of the i-gel Plus use during elective procedures under general anaesthesia, its intraoperative performance, and the degree of postoperative complications. Methods and analysis: This is a multicenter, prospective, interventional cohort study. The enrolment will take place in seven centers in four European countries. We plan to enrol 2000 adult patients in total, who are scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia, and with an indication for use of a supraglottic airway device for management of their airway. The study is projected to run over a period of 18 months. The primary outcome of the study is the total success rate of the i-gel Plus insertion in terms of successful ventilation and oxygenation through the device. Secondary outcomes include perioperative parameters, such as insertion time, seal/leak pressures, number of insertion attempts, and postoperative adverse events and complications. Postoperative follow-up will be performed at 1 hour, 24 hours in all patients, and for selected patients at 3 and 6 months. Ethics and dissemination: The trial has received the following ethical approvals: General University Hospital Prague, University Hospital Olomouc, University Military Hospital Prague, University Hospital Barcelona, University Hospital Lodz, Antrim Area Hospital, Craigavon Area Hospital, Office for Research Ethics Committees Northern Ireland. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant anaesthesia conferences.

scholarly journals AIRWAY DEVICE

2010 ◽  
Vol 17 (04) ◽  
pp. 643-647
Author(s):  
ANSAR ALI ◽  
LIAQAT ALI ◽  
NASEEM ALI SHEIKH ◽  
Shamila Athar Siddique
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Random Number ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Airway Device ◽  
Supraglottic Airway ◽  
Statistical Significant Difference ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Random Number Table ◽  
American Society ◽  
American Society Of Anesthesiologists

Introduction: Intersurgical-gel (I-gel) is a new supraglottic airway device that is widely being used to secure airway during general anaesthesia. Objectives: The objective of the study is to compare the ease of insertion of Intersurgical-gel and Laryngeal mask airway (LMA). Material & Method: This study was conducted in Department of anaesthesia Hameed Latif Hospital, Lahore. 100 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II, patients were enrolled in this study for elective surgery divided in 2 groups of 50 each. LMA and I-gel were used in groups A and B respectively for intra operative maintenance of airway. Randomization through random number table in Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 17 was used. Results: There were 50 patients in both groups. There were no statistical significant difference between the patients age of two groups. There was absolutely no difference between 2 groups regarding ease of insertion because both groups had 84% easy and 16% satisfactory insertions. Insertion time of LMA and I-gel in First and Second attempt were also comparable and statistically nonsignificant. Airway manipulations was required in both groups for insertion of device, in LMA group 30% required and 70% did not require and in i-gel group 48% required and 52% did not require. There is no statistical significant difference between both groups. Bleeding was noticed on 2% of i-gel and with LMA no bleeding occurred and 2% laryngospasm incidence noticed in both groups. Conclusion: we found that regarding ease of insertion there is statistically no significant difference between I-gel and LMA.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the insertion parameters and complications of the i-gel Plus airway device for maintaining patent airway during planned procedures under general anaesthesia: a protocol for a prospective multicentre cohort study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e053215
Author(s):  
Olga Klementova ◽  
Taranpreet Kaur Bhoday ◽  
Jakub Werner ◽  
Ana M Lopez ◽  
Will Donaldson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
General Anaesthesia ◽  
Airway Device ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Supraglottic Airway ◽  
Military Hospital ◽  
Supraglottic Airway Device ◽  
Supraglottic Airway Devices

IntroductionSupraglottic airway devices represent a less invasive method of airway management than tracheal intubation during general anaesthesia. Their continued development is focused mainly on improvements in the insertion success rate and minimalisation of perioperative and postoperative complications. The i-gel Plus is a novel, anatomically preshaped supraglottic airway device which achieves a perilaryngeal seal due to a non-inflatable cuff made of a soft thermoplastic elastomer. The purpose of this cohort study is to assess the success rate of the i-gel Plus use during elective procedures under general anaesthesia, its intraoperative performance, and the degree of postoperative complications.Methods and analysisThis is a multicentre, prospective, interventional cohort study. The enrolment will take place in seven centres in four European countries. We plan to enrol 2000 adult patients in total, who are scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia, and with an indication for use of a supraglottic airway device for management of their airway. The study is projected to run over a period of 18 months. The primary outcome of the study is the total success rate of the i-gel Plus insertion in terms of successful ventilation and oxygenation through the device. Secondary outcomes include perioperative parameters, such as insertion time, seal/leak pressures, number of insertion attempts and postoperative adverse events and complications. Postoperative follow-up will be performed at 1 hour, 24 hours in all patients, and for selected patients at 3 and 6 months.Ethics and disseminationThe cohort study has received the following ethical approvals: General University Hospital Prague, University Hospital Olomouc, University Military Hospital Prague, University Hospital Barcelona, University Hospital Lodz, Antrim Area Hospital, Craigavon Area Hospital, Office for Research Ethics Committees Northern Ireland. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant anaesthesia conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN86233693;Pre-results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document