Comparison of I-Gel and classic Laryngeal Mask Airway in paediatric population: a parallel group study

Authors

  • Shanta Sapkota Kanti Children's Hospital, Maharajgunj, Kathmandu 44600
  • Pawan Kumar Hamal National Academy of Medical Sciences, Bir Hospital, Kanti Path, Kathmandu 44600
  • Sadichhya Shah Malla Kanti Children's Hospital, Maharajgunj, Kathmandu 44600

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3126/jsan.v3i2.15618

Keywords:

Airway, I -gel, Laryngeal mask airway, supraglottic devices

Abstract

Background: I-gel, the novel Supraglottic airway device, is easier to insert, has improved stability after insertion with reduced tissue compression.The study aims to compare the efficacy of I-gel with classic Laryngeal Mask Airway in the paediatric population.

Methods: A randomised parallel group study was done in Department of Anesthesiology, Kanti Children Hospital, Kathmandu for a period of three months. I gel and classic LMA was compared based on leak airway pressure, time of insertion and ease of insertion.

Results: Age and weight are comparable among groups. Compared to cLMA, I-gel provides a better leak pressure seal (16.40+-3.42 vs. 23.11+- 6.17 cm of H2O, p 0.027), faster time of insertion (19.42+-4.40 vs. 29.84+-7.70 seconds, p-0.02) and similar ease of insertion (p-0.571).

Conclusions: I-gel compared to classic Laryngeal Mask Airway provides better resistance to leak airway pressure, faster time of insertion with comparable ease of insertion.

Author Biographies

Shanta Sapkota, Kanti Children's Hospital, Maharajgunj, Kathmandu 44600

Senior Consultant Anesthesiologist

Pawan Kumar Hamal, National Academy of Medical Sciences, Bir Hospital, Kanti Path, Kathmandu 44600

Anesthesiologist

References

<ol>
<li>Ramesh S, Jayanthi R. Supraglottic airway devices in children. Indian J Anaesth 2011;55:476-82. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.89874">http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.89874</a> <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22174464">[PMid:22174464]</a> <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3237147/">[PMCid:PMC3237147]</a></li>
<li>Cook T, Howes B. Supraglottic airway devices: recent advances. Continuing Education in Anaesthesia Critical Care &amp; Pain 2011;11:56-61. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjaceaccp/mkq058">http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjaceaccp/mkq058</a></li>
<li>Twigg S, Brown JM, Williams R. Swelling and cyanosis of the tongue associated with use of a laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia and intensive care 2000;28:449-50. <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10969377">[PMid:10969377]</a></li>
<li>Ouellette RG. The effect of nitrous oxide on laryngeal mask cuff pressure. American association of nurse anaesthetists journal 2000;68:411-4.</li>
<li>Beylacq L, Bordes M, Semjen F, Cros AM. 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;53:376-9. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-6576.2008.01869.x">http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-6576.2008.01869.x</a> <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19243322">[PMid:19243322]</a></li>
<li>Jolliffe L, Jackson I. Airway management in outpatient setting: New techniques and devices. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2008;21:719-22. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACO.0b013e328316bb57">http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACO.0b013e328316bb57</a> <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18997523">[PMid:18997523]</a></li>
<li>Das B, Mitra S, Jamil SN, Varshney RK. Comparison of three supraglottic devices in anesthetised paralyzed children undergoing elective surgery. Saudi J Anaesth 2012;6:224-8. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.101212">http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.101212</a> <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23162394">[PMid:23162394]</a> <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3498659/">[PMCid:PMC3498659]</a></li>
<li>Information Sheet: Airway management has evolved. UK: Intersurgical Ltd; 2016 [cited 2016 August 20]; Available from: www.intersurgical.com/content/files/73038/-332935175</li>
<li>Lee JR, Kim MS, Kim JT, Byon HJ, Paek YH, Kim HS et al. A randomised trial comparing the I-gel with the LMA Classic in children. Anaesthesia 2012:67;606-11. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2012.07072.x">http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2012.07072.x</a> <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22352745">[PMid:22352745]</a></li>
<li>Janakiraman C, Chethan DB, Wilkes AR, Stacey MR, Goodwin N. A randomised crossover trial comparing the i-gel supraglottic airway and classic laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia 2009:64;674-8. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2009.05898.x">http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2009.05898.x</a> <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19453322">[PMid:19453322]</a></li>
</ol>

Downloads

Published

2016-09-17

How to Cite

Sapkota, S., Hamal, P. K., & Shah Malla, S. (2016). Comparison of I-Gel and classic Laryngeal Mask Airway in paediatric population: a parallel group study. Journal of Society of Anesthesiologists of Nepal, 3(2), 80-83. https://doi.org/10.3126/jsan.v3i2.15618

Issue

Section

Original Article