A prospective randomised trial to compare three insertion techniques for i-gel™ placement: Standard, reverse, and rotation

Background and Aims: This prospective randomised study was done to compare standard, reverse, and rotation techniques of i-gel™ placement in terms of insertion characteristics and success rate. Material and Methods: After institutional ethics committee approval, 135 patients aged 18-50 years, ASA I...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mamta Bhardwaj, Suresh K Singhal, Rashmi, Amit Dahiya
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2020-01-01
Series:Indian Journal of Anaesthesia
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ijaweb.org/article.asp?issn=0019-5049;year=2020;volume=64;issue=7;spage=618;epage=623;aulast=Bhardwaj
_version_ 1819109817509216256
author Mamta Bhardwaj
Suresh K Singhal
Rashmi
Amit Dahiya
author_facet Mamta Bhardwaj
Suresh K Singhal
Rashmi
Amit Dahiya
author_sort Mamta Bhardwaj
collection DOAJ
description Background and Aims: This prospective randomised study was done to compare standard, reverse, and rotation techniques of i-gel™ placement in terms of insertion characteristics and success rate. Material and Methods: After institutional ethics committee approval, 135 patients aged 18-50 years, ASA I and II undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia were included. After induction of anesthesia, i-gel™ was inserted by standard, reverse, and rotation technique in Groups I, II, and III, respectively. The primary objective was mean time of insertion. Secondary variables included ease of insertion, first attempt success rate, manoeuvres required, fiberoptic view of placement, oropharyngeal leak pressure, ease of placement of nasogastric tube, and complications if any. Results: Mean time of insertion was 18.04 ± 5.65 s, 15.00 ± 5.72 s and 16.12 ± 5.84 s for groups I, II, and III, respectively. Time taken for insertion was shortest and significantly lower (P = 0.048) for group II compared to group I. Insertion time was comparable between rest of groups. The overall success rate in groups I, II, and III were 91.1%, 95.6%, and 93.3% respectively (P = 0.7). The first attempt success rate was 82.2%, 89%, and 84.4% in groups I, II and III, respectively (P = 0.07). Manoeuvres were required in five (12.19%) patients in group I, four (9.30%) patients in group II, and three (7.14%) patients in group III (P = 0.602). Complications occurred in eight, three, and three patients in groups I, II, and III, respectively. Conclusion: All techniques of i-gel insertion are equally good and choice of technique depends upon the experience and comfort of the investigator with the particular technique.
first_indexed 2024-12-22T03:31:51Z
format Article
id doaj.art-8139e2e97ddb4ebfaf13d0c98a2df881
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 0019-5049
0976-2817
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-22T03:31:51Z
publishDate 2020-01-01
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
record_format Article
series Indian Journal of Anaesthesia
spelling doaj.art-8139e2e97ddb4ebfaf13d0c98a2df8812022-12-21T18:40:29ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsIndian Journal of Anaesthesia0019-50490976-28172020-01-0164761862310.4103/ija.IJA_937_19A prospective randomised trial to compare three insertion techniques for i-gel™ placement: Standard, reverse, and rotationMamta BhardwajSuresh K SinghalRashmiAmit DahiyaBackground and Aims: This prospective randomised study was done to compare standard, reverse, and rotation techniques of i-gel™ placement in terms of insertion characteristics and success rate. Material and Methods: After institutional ethics committee approval, 135 patients aged 18-50 years, ASA I and II undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia were included. After induction of anesthesia, i-gel™ was inserted by standard, reverse, and rotation technique in Groups I, II, and III, respectively. The primary objective was mean time of insertion. Secondary variables included ease of insertion, first attempt success rate, manoeuvres required, fiberoptic view of placement, oropharyngeal leak pressure, ease of placement of nasogastric tube, and complications if any. Results: Mean time of insertion was 18.04 ± 5.65 s, 15.00 ± 5.72 s and 16.12 ± 5.84 s for groups I, II, and III, respectively. Time taken for insertion was shortest and significantly lower (P = 0.048) for group II compared to group I. Insertion time was comparable between rest of groups. The overall success rate in groups I, II, and III were 91.1%, 95.6%, and 93.3% respectively (P = 0.7). The first attempt success rate was 82.2%, 89%, and 84.4% in groups I, II and III, respectively (P = 0.07). Manoeuvres were required in five (12.19%) patients in group I, four (9.30%) patients in group II, and three (7.14%) patients in group III (P = 0.602). Complications occurred in eight, three, and three patients in groups I, II, and III, respectively. Conclusion: All techniques of i-gel insertion are equally good and choice of technique depends upon the experience and comfort of the investigator with the particular technique.http://www.ijaweb.org/article.asp?issn=0019-5049;year=2020;volume=64;issue=7;spage=618;epage=623;aulast=Bhardwajairway managementfiberopticgeneral anesthesiarotationsupraglottic airway
spellingShingle Mamta Bhardwaj
Suresh K Singhal
Rashmi
Amit Dahiya
A prospective randomised trial to compare three insertion techniques for i-gel™ placement: Standard, reverse, and rotation
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia
airway management
fiberoptic
general anesthesia
rotation
supraglottic airway
title A prospective randomised trial to compare three insertion techniques for i-gel™ placement: Standard, reverse, and rotation
title_full A prospective randomised trial to compare three insertion techniques for i-gel™ placement: Standard, reverse, and rotation
title_fullStr A prospective randomised trial to compare three insertion techniques for i-gel™ placement: Standard, reverse, and rotation
title_full_unstemmed A prospective randomised trial to compare three insertion techniques for i-gel™ placement: Standard, reverse, and rotation
title_short A prospective randomised trial to compare three insertion techniques for i-gel™ placement: Standard, reverse, and rotation
title_sort prospective randomised trial to compare three insertion techniques for i gel™ placement standard reverse and rotation
topic airway management
fiberoptic
general anesthesia
rotation
supraglottic airway
url http://www.ijaweb.org/article.asp?issn=0019-5049;year=2020;volume=64;issue=7;spage=618;epage=623;aulast=Bhardwaj
work_keys_str_mv AT mamtabhardwaj aprospectiverandomisedtrialtocomparethreeinsertiontechniquesforigelplacementstandardreverseandrotation
AT sureshksinghal aprospectiverandomisedtrialtocomparethreeinsertiontechniquesforigelplacementstandardreverseandrotation
AT rashmi aprospectiverandomisedtrialtocomparethreeinsertiontechniquesforigelplacementstandardreverseandrotation
AT amitdahiya aprospectiverandomisedtrialtocomparethreeinsertiontechniquesforigelplacementstandardreverseandrotation
AT mamtabhardwaj prospectiverandomisedtrialtocomparethreeinsertiontechniquesforigelplacementstandardreverseandrotation
AT sureshksinghal prospectiverandomisedtrialtocomparethreeinsertiontechniquesforigelplacementstandardreverseandrotation
AT rashmi prospectiverandomisedtrialtocomparethreeinsertiontechniquesforigelplacementstandardreverseandrotation
AT amitdahiya prospectiverandomisedtrialtocomparethreeinsertiontechniquesforigelplacementstandardreverseandrotation