A comparison of supraglottic airway i-gel™ vs. classic laryngeal mask airway in small children
Backgroundi-gel™ is a new single-use supraglottic airway device without an inflatable cuff. This study was designed to compare the usefulness of i-gel™ versus a classic laryngeal mask airway (cLMA) in small children.MethodsSixty-three children (age range : 4-72 months) were randomly assigned to an i...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Korean Society of Anesthesiologists
2014-02-01
|
| Series: | Korean Journal of Anesthesiology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://ekja.org/upload/pdf/kjae-66-127.pdf |
| _version_ | 1828435199141085184 |
|---|---|
| author | Ju-Hyun Lee Hyun-Seok Cho Won-Jung Shin Hong-Seuk Yang |
| author_facet | Ju-Hyun Lee Hyun-Seok Cho Won-Jung Shin Hong-Seuk Yang |
| author_sort | Ju-Hyun Lee |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Backgroundi-gel™ is a new single-use supraglottic airway device without an inflatable cuff. This study was designed to compare the usefulness of i-gel™ versus a classic laryngeal mask airway (cLMA) in small children.MethodsSixty-three children (age range : 4-72 months) were randomly assigned to an i-gel™ or cLMA group. We evaluated hemodynamic data, airway sealing ability, the success rate of insertion, and adverse events including an inadvertent sliding out during ventilation.ResultsDemographic data and hemodynamic data obtained immediately after the insertion of these devices did not differ between the two groups. The success rates for insertion on the first attempt were 77 and 84% for i-gel™ and cLMA, respectively (P = 0.54), and the overall success rates were 87 and 100% respectively (P = 0.14). There were no significant differences in terms of airway leak pressure. The inserted i-gel™ inadvertently slid out in 8 of 31 patients but only one sliding out case occurred in the cLMA group (P = 0.02). There were no differences between the groups in terms of other side effects (e.g., coughing, bleeding) associated with the use of i-gel™ and cLMA (P = 0.75 and 0.49, respectively).ConclusionsOropharyngeal leak pressure and insertion success rate of i-gel™ are similar to those of cLMA. However, i-gel™ is prone to inadvertent sliding out of the mouth in small children. Therefore, it is recommended that the i-gel™ should be secured more tightly to avoid displacement of the device. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-10T19:02:02Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b8bb5ad0bcec498a93778ea31b879806 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2005-6419 2005-7563 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-10T19:02:02Z |
| publishDate | 2014-02-01 |
| publisher | Korean Society of Anesthesiologists |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Korean Journal of Anesthesiology |
| spelling | doaj.art-b8bb5ad0bcec498a93778ea31b8798062022-12-22T01:36:59ZengKorean Society of AnesthesiologistsKorean Journal of Anesthesiology2005-64192005-75632014-02-0166212713010.4097/kjae.2014.66.2.1277813A comparison of supraglottic airway i-gel™ vs. classic laryngeal mask airway in small childrenJu-Hyun Lee0Hyun-Seok Cho1Won-Jung Shin2Hong-Seuk Yang3Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Asan Mdical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicien, Seoul, Korea.Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Asan Mdical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicien, Seoul, Korea.Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Asan Mdical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicien, Seoul, Korea.Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Asan Mdical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicien, Seoul, Korea.Backgroundi-gel™ is a new single-use supraglottic airway device without an inflatable cuff. This study was designed to compare the usefulness of i-gel™ versus a classic laryngeal mask airway (cLMA) in small children.MethodsSixty-three children (age range : 4-72 months) were randomly assigned to an i-gel™ or cLMA group. We evaluated hemodynamic data, airway sealing ability, the success rate of insertion, and adverse events including an inadvertent sliding out during ventilation.ResultsDemographic data and hemodynamic data obtained immediately after the insertion of these devices did not differ between the two groups. The success rates for insertion on the first attempt were 77 and 84% for i-gel™ and cLMA, respectively (P = 0.54), and the overall success rates were 87 and 100% respectively (P = 0.14). There were no significant differences in terms of airway leak pressure. The inserted i-gel™ inadvertently slid out in 8 of 31 patients but only one sliding out case occurred in the cLMA group (P = 0.02). There were no differences between the groups in terms of other side effects (e.g., coughing, bleeding) associated with the use of i-gel™ and cLMA (P = 0.75 and 0.49, respectively).ConclusionsOropharyngeal leak pressure and insertion success rate of i-gel™ are similar to those of cLMA. However, i-gel™ is prone to inadvertent sliding out of the mouth in small children. Therefore, it is recommended that the i-gel™ should be secured more tightly to avoid displacement of the device.http://ekja.org/upload/pdf/kjae-66-127.pdflaryngeal mask airwayi-gel™ |
| spellingShingle | Ju-Hyun Lee Hyun-Seok Cho Won-Jung Shin Hong-Seuk Yang A comparison of supraglottic airway i-gel™ vs. classic laryngeal mask airway in small children Korean Journal of Anesthesiology laryngeal mask airway i-gel™ |
| title | A comparison of supraglottic airway i-gel™ vs. classic laryngeal mask airway in small children |
| title_full | A comparison of supraglottic airway i-gel™ vs. classic laryngeal mask airway in small children |
| title_fullStr | A comparison of supraglottic airway i-gel™ vs. classic laryngeal mask airway in small children |
| title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of supraglottic airway i-gel™ vs. classic laryngeal mask airway in small children |
| title_short | A comparison of supraglottic airway i-gel™ vs. classic laryngeal mask airway in small children |
| title_sort | comparison of supraglottic airway i gel™ vs classic laryngeal mask airway in small children |
| topic | laryngeal mask airway i-gel™ |
| url | http://ekja.org/upload/pdf/kjae-66-127.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT juhyunlee acomparisonofsupraglotticairwayigelvsclassiclaryngealmaskairwayinsmallchildren AT hyunseokcho acomparisonofsupraglotticairwayigelvsclassiclaryngealmaskairwayinsmallchildren AT wonjungshin acomparisonofsupraglotticairwayigelvsclassiclaryngealmaskairwayinsmallchildren AT hongseukyang acomparisonofsupraglotticairwayigelvsclassiclaryngealmaskairwayinsmallchildren AT juhyunlee comparisonofsupraglotticairwayigelvsclassiclaryngealmaskairwayinsmallchildren AT hyunseokcho comparisonofsupraglotticairwayigelvsclassiclaryngealmaskairwayinsmallchildren AT wonjungshin comparisonofsupraglotticairwayigelvsclassiclaryngealmaskairwayinsmallchildren AT hongseukyang comparisonofsupraglotticairwayigelvsclassiclaryngealmaskairwayinsmallchildren |