» Articles » PMID: 33823205

Comparison of Proseal LMA with I-Gel in Children Under Controlled Ventilation: a Prospective Randomised Clinical Study

Overview
Specialty Anesthesiology
Date 2021 Apr 6
PMID 33823205
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Supraglottic airway device is presently the most common modality of airway management in children for short surgical procedures. The i-gel is one such novel supraglottic airway device with a non-inflatable cuff. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficiency of i-gel compared to LMA Proseal regarding oropharyngeal leak pressure, insertion time, ease of insertion, and fibreoptic view of larynx.

Methods: After obtaining ethical clearance and parental consent, 70 children aged 2-10 years, weighing 10-30 kg were randomised to receive LMA Proseal or i-gel for airway management. Data with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure, insertion time, ease of insertion, number of attempts, and fibreoptic score were collected. The primary outcome was the oropharyngeal leak pressure with the two supraglottic airway devices measured by manometric stability.

Results: Demographic data were comparable between the two groups. The oropharyngeal leak pressure (LMA Proseal vs. i-gel, 20.51 ± 4.71 cmHO vs. 19.57 ± 5.71 cmHO), ease of insertion, number of attempts, and fibreoptic view score was similar between the two groups. The insertion time was faster with i-gel (22.63 ± 5.79 s) compared to LMA Proseal (43.26 ± 7.85 s).

Conclusion: I-gel was similar to LMA Proseal with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure in children under controlled ventilation.

Citing Articles

Comparison of Baska Mask Versus Proseal Laryngeal Mask Airway in Elective Surgeries Under General Anaesthesia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Jose J, Kagalkar N, Kattimani M, Suntan A Cureus. 2023; 15(4):e37366.

PMID: 37182077 PMC: 10170866. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.37366.


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.

References
1.
Nirupa R, Gombar S, Ahuja V, Sharma P . A randomised trial to compare i-gel and ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway for airway management in paediatric patients. Indian J Anaesth. 2016; 60(10):726-731. PMC: 5064696. DOI: 10.4103/0019-5049.191670. View

2.
Hosten T, Gurkan Y, Kus A, Ozdamar D, Aksu C, Solak M . Comparison of ProSeal LMA with Supreme LMA in paediatric patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2013; 57(8):996-1001. DOI: 10.1111/aas.12149. View

3.
Saran S, Mishra S, Badhe A, Vasudevan A, Elakkumanan L, Mishra G . Comparison of i-gel supraglottic airway and LMA-ProSeal™ in pediatric patients under controlled ventilation. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2014; 30(2):195-8. PMC: 4009638. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9185.130013. View

4.
Komasawa N, Nishihara I, Tatsumi S, Minami T . Does prewarming the i-gel supraglottic airway device fit the larynx better compared to keeping it at room temperature for non-paralysed, sedated patients: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(1):e006653. PMC: 4298088. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006653. View

5.
Ramesh S, Jayanthi R, Archana S . Paediatric airway management: What is new?. Indian J Anaesth. 2013; 56(5):448-53. PMC: 3530999. DOI: 10.4103/0019-5049.103959. View