» Articles » PMID: 22965330

A Randomized Comparison of the I-gel and the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway in Pediatric Patients: Performance and Fiberoptic Findings

Overview
Journal J Anesth
Specialty Anesthesiology
Date 2012 Sep 12
PMID 22965330
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: We compared the insertion performance of the pediatric size 1.5-3 i-gel airway device with that of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) in anesthetized children in a prospective, randomized, controlled manner.

Methods: We included 134 children, aged 3 months to 15 years, scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia. They were randomly divided into the i-gel and the PLMA groups according to the airway device used. The primary outcome variable was oropharyngeal leak pressure. Other outcome variables were ease of insertion, required time for insertion, fiberoptic view, and first-attempt and overall success rates.

Results: There were no differences in the ease of insertion, insertion time, or leak pressure between the devices. Fiberoptic view was significantly better with the i-gel than with the PLMA (P = 0.002). The view was significantly better with the sizes 2, 2.5, and 3 i-gel than with the size 1.5 i-gel (P = 0.02, 0.004 and 0.002, respectively), and the view was significantly better with the sizes 2.5 and 3 PLMA than with the size 1.5 PLMA (P = 0.02 and 0.005, respectively). The first-attempt success rates were 94 and 97 % in the i-gel and the PLMA groups, respectively; the success rates including the second attempt were 100 % in both groups. No children developed side effects requiring treatment with either device.

Conclusion: Both the pediatric i-gel and the PLMA were successfully inserted in children. The fiberoptic view was better with the i-gel than with the PLMA.

Citing Articles

Contrast of oropharyngeal leak pressure and clinical performance of I-gel™ and LMA ProSeal™ in patients: A meta-analysis.

Tan Y, Jiang J, Wang R PLoS One. 2022; 17(12):e0278871.

PMID: 36520843 PMC: 9754199. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278871.


Comparison of the clinical performance of i-gel and Ambu laryngeal masks in anaesthetised paediatric patients: A meta-analysis.

Bao D, Yu Y, Xiong W, Wang Y, Liang Y, Li L World J Clin Cases. 2022; 10(4):1242-1254.

PMID: 35211557 PMC: 8855187. DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i4.1242.


Cluster cross-over randomised trial of paediatric airway management devices in the simulation lab and operating room among paramedic students.

Hansen M, Wagner A, Schnapp A, Lin A, Le N, Deverman S Emerg Med J. 2020; 38(1):27-32.

PMID: 33046528 PMC: 8064274. DOI: 10.1136/emermed-2020-209929.


A study of effect of lateral position on oropharyngeal seal pressure of i-gel and ProSeal LMA in children.

Thakur D, Malde A Indian J Anaesth. 2020; 64(2):125-130.

PMID: 32139930 PMC: 7017671. DOI: 10.4103/ija.IJA_635_19.


Comparison of the clinical performance of the flexible laryngeal mask airway in pediatric patients under general anesthesia with or without a muscle relaxant: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Byun S, Kim S, Kim E Trials. 2019; 20(1):31.

PMID: 30626406 PMC: 6325664. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-018-3141-2.


References
1.
Sudhir G, Redfern D, Hall J, Wilkes A, Cann C . A comparison of the disposable Ambu AuraOnce Laryngeal Mask with the reusable LMA Classic laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia. 2007; 62(7):719-22. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2007.05067.x. View

2.
Holm-Knudsen R, Rasmussen L . Paediatric airway management: basic aspects. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2009; 53(1):1-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2008.01794.x. View

3.
Kelly F, Sale S, Bayley G, Cook T, Stoddart P, White M . A cohort evaluation of the pediatric ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in 100 children. Paediatr Anaesth. 2008; 18(10):947-51. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2008.02705.x. View

4.
Beylacq L, Bordes M, Semjen F, Cros A . The I-gel, a single-use supraglottic airway device with a non-inflatable cuff and an esophageal vent: an observational study in children. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2009; 53(3):376-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2008.01869.x. View

5.
Theiler L, Kleine-Brueggeney M, Kaiser D, Urwyler N, Luyet C, Vogt A . Crossover comparison of the laryngeal mask supreme and the i-gel in simulated difficult airway scenario in anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology. 2009; 111(1):55-62. DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181a4c6b9. View