Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 49 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 244 - 249 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614 İndeks Tarihi: 13-10-2021

Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population

Öz:
Objectives: Both the Supreme Laryngeal Mask Airway (SLMA) and the I-gel (I-gel) are supraglottic airway devices (SADs) commonlyused for airway management in paediatric patients. This study aims to compare the efficacy in terms of insertion and ventilation profiles of size2 SLMA and the I-gel in anaesthetised paediatric patients.Methods: 100 children were prospectively allocated to two groups depending upon the device inserted as SLMA (n = 50) and I-gel (n = 50).The primary outcomes were studied in terms of ease of insertion, haemodynamic changes, ventilation parameters, leak pressure and incidencesof complications during general anaesthesia.Results: There were no failed attempts in the insertion of the airways in either group. The SLMA was more easily inserted in the majority of casescompared to the I-gel group. The number of attempts for insertion and the time taken for insertion were comparable in the I-gel and the SLMAgroup (13.84 6 2.38 vs. 14.02 6 1.7) (P .57, .66). Securing an effective airway took <30 seconds in both the groups with an overall median duration of 15 seconds. There was no difficulty in passing the gastric tube in either group (P < .30). There was a statistical difference between the oropharyngeal seal pressure (OSP), which was 25.18 6 1.59 and 22.10 6 1.36 cmH2O for SLMA and I-gel, respectively (P < .001). Haemodynamicparameters after the insertion of the device were comparable, and there were no clinically important complications in the post-operative period.Conclusions: Both the devices appeared to be simple and suitable for airway management during elective surgery in paediatric patients. However, the SLMA was easily inserted with less insertion time in the majority of patients. Also, it provides higher OSP during anaesthesia and isbetter tolerated during emergence, with minimal risk of injury to the oropharynx.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • 1. Gupta S, Dogra N, Chauhan K. Comparison of i-gel and laryngeal mask airway supreme in different head and neck positions in spontaneously breathing paediatric population. Anesth Essays Res. 2017;11(3):647-650. [CrossRef]
  • 2. Dhanda A, Singh S, Bhalotra AR, Siddharth Chavali. Clinical comparison of I-gel supraglottic airway device and cuffedendotracheal tube for pressure-controlled ventilation during routine surgical procedures. Turk J Anaesth Reanim. 2017;45(5):270-276. [CrossRef]
  • 3. Van Zundert AA, Skinner MW, Van Zundert TC, Luney SR, Pandit JJ. Value of knowing physical characteristics of the airway device before using it. Br J Anaesth. 2016;117(1):12-16. [CrossRef] 4. Levitan RM, Kinkle WC. Initial anatomic investigations of the I-gel airway: A novel supraglottic airway without inflatable cuff. Anaesthesia. 2005;60(10):1022-1026. [CrossRef]
  • 5. I. Gel User Guide. 7th ed. Intersurgical Ltd.; 2009. Accessed February 16, 2011. http://www.igel.com.
  • 6. Ragazzi R, Finessi L, Farinelli I, Alvisi R, Volta CA. LMA supreme vsi-gel—A comparison of insertion success in novices. Anaesthesia. 2012;67(4):384-388. [CrossRef]
  • 7. Joly N, Poulin LP, Tanoubi I, Drolet P, Donati F, St-Pierre P. Randomized prospective trial comparing two supraglottic airway devices: I-gel and LMA-Supreme in paralysed patients. Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth. 2014;61:794-800.
  • 8. Chew EE, Hashim NH, Wang CY. Randomised comparison of the LMA supreme with the I-gel in spontaneously breathing anaesthetised adult patients. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2010;38(6):1018-1022. [CrossRef]
  • 9. Theiler LG, Kleine-Brueggeney M, Kaiser D, et al. Crossover comparison of the laryngeal mask SupremeTM and the I-GelTM in simulated difficult airway scenario in anaesthetised patients. Anesthesiology. 2009;111:55-62. [CrossRef]
  • 10. Jagannathan N, Sommers K, Sohn LE, et al. A randomised equivalence trial comparing the i-gel and laryngeal mask airway supreme in children. Paediatr Anaesth. 2013;23(2):127- 133. [CrossRef]
  • 11. Kus A, Gok CN, Hosten T, Gurkan Y, Solak M, Toker K. The LMA supreme versus the I-gel in simulated difficult airway in children: A randomised controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2014;31(5):280-284. [CrossRef]
  • 12. Jain D, Ghai B, Bala I, Banerjee G, 13. Mason D. Evaluation of I-gel airway in different head and neck positions in anesthetised paralysed children. Paediatr Anaesth. 2015;25(12):1248- 1253. [CrossRef]
  • 13. Hughes C, Place K, Berg S, Mason D. A clinical evaluation of the i-gel supraglottic airway device in children. Paediatr Anaesth. 2012;22(8):765-771. [CrossRef] 14. Chen X, Jiao J, Cong X, Liu L, Wu X. A comparison of the performance of the I-gel vs the LMA-S during anaesthesia: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):E71910. [CrossRef]
  • 15. Zhang L, Seet E, Mehta V, et al. Oropharyngeal leak pressure with the laryngeal mask airway supreme at different intracuff pressures: A randomised controlled trial. Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth. 2011;58:624-629. [CrossRef]
  • 16. Wang F, Zhang R. Application of the LMA-Supreme and i-gel laryngeal masks during pelvic operations in adults. Asian J Surg. 2016;39(1):1-5. [CrossRef]
APA AGGARWAL M, Yadav D, SİNGH S, BANSAL D (2021). Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population. , 244 - 249. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
Chicago AGGARWAL Manish,Yadav Dr. Rahul,SİNGH Shalendra,BANSAL Deepali Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population. (2021): 244 - 249. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
MLA AGGARWAL Manish,Yadav Dr. Rahul,SİNGH Shalendra,BANSAL Deepali Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population. , 2021, ss.244 - 249. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
AMA AGGARWAL M,Yadav D,SİNGH S,BANSAL D Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population. . 2021; 244 - 249. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
Vancouver AGGARWAL M,Yadav D,SİNGH S,BANSAL D Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population. . 2021; 244 - 249. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
IEEE AGGARWAL M,Yadav D,SİNGH S,BANSAL D "Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population." , ss.244 - 249, 2021. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
ISNAD AGGARWAL, Manish vd. "Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population". (2021), 244-249. https://doi.org/10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
APA AGGARWAL M, Yadav D, SİNGH S, BANSAL D (2021). Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population. Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, 49(3), 244 - 249. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
Chicago AGGARWAL Manish,Yadav Dr. Rahul,SİNGH Shalendra,BANSAL Deepali Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population. Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation 49, no.3 (2021): 244 - 249. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
MLA AGGARWAL Manish,Yadav Dr. Rahul,SİNGH Shalendra,BANSAL Deepali Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population. Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, vol.49, no.3, 2021, ss.244 - 249. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
AMA AGGARWAL M,Yadav D,SİNGH S,BANSAL D Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population. Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation. 2021; 49(3): 244 - 249. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
Vancouver AGGARWAL M,Yadav D,SİNGH S,BANSAL D Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population. Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation. 2021; 49(3): 244 - 249. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
IEEE AGGARWAL M,Yadav D,SİNGH S,BANSAL D "Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population." Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, 49, ss.244 - 249, 2021. 10.5152/TJAR.2021.614
ISNAD AGGARWAL, Manish vd. "Clinical Comparison of I-gel and Laryngeal Mask Airway-Supreme Airway Devices During General Anaesthesia in the Paediatric Population". Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation 49/3 (2021), 244-249. https://doi.org/10.5152/TJAR.2021.614