Cargando…
Comparison of Clinical Performance of I-Gel™ with LMA—Proseal™ in Elective Surgeries
SUMMARY: Sixty ASA grade I & II adult patients of either sex were randomly assigned into two groups. Group I (n=30) for I-gel and Group P (n=30) for LMA – ProSeal. We assessed the airway sealing pressure, ease of insertion, success rate of insertion, ease of gastric tube placement, airway trauma...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications
2009
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2900120/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20640137 |
_version_ | 1782183591762984960 |
---|---|
author | Singh, Ishwar Gupta, Monika Tandon, Mansi |
author_facet | Singh, Ishwar Gupta, Monika Tandon, Mansi |
author_sort | Singh, Ishwar |
collection | PubMed |
description | SUMMARY: Sixty ASA grade I & II adult patients of either sex were randomly assigned into two groups. Group I (n=30) for I-gel and Group P (n=30) for LMA – ProSeal. We assessed the airway sealing pressure, ease of insertion, success rate of insertion, ease of gastric tube placement, airway trauma by post operative blood staining of the device, tongue, lip and dental trauma, hoarseness, regurgitation / aspiration and cost effectiveness. Although the airway sealing pressure was higher with Group P (29.6 cm H(2)O) than with Group I (25.27 cm H(2)0) (p < 0.05), but the airway sealing pressure of Group I was very well within the normal limit to prevent aspiration. The ease of insertion was more with Group I (29/30) than with Group P (25/30) (p < 0.05). The success rate of first attempt of insertion and ease of gastric tube placement was more with Group I (p > 0.05). Blood staining of the device & tongue, lip and dental trauma was more with Group P (p >0.05). There was no evidence of bronchospasm, laryngospasm, regurgitation, aspiration or hoarseness in either group. To conclude I-gel is a novel supraglottic device with an acceptable airway sealing pressure (25.27 cm H(2)O). It is easier to insert, requires less attempts of insertion, has easier gastric tube placement and is less traumatic as compared to LMA-ProSeal. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2900120 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2009 |
publisher | Medknow Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-29001202010-07-16 Comparison of Clinical Performance of I-Gel™ with LMA—Proseal™ in Elective Surgeries Singh, Ishwar Gupta, Monika Tandon, Mansi Indian J Anaesth Clinical Investigation SUMMARY: Sixty ASA grade I & II adult patients of either sex were randomly assigned into two groups. Group I (n=30) for I-gel and Group P (n=30) for LMA – ProSeal. We assessed the airway sealing pressure, ease of insertion, success rate of insertion, ease of gastric tube placement, airway trauma by post operative blood staining of the device, tongue, lip and dental trauma, hoarseness, regurgitation / aspiration and cost effectiveness. Although the airway sealing pressure was higher with Group P (29.6 cm H(2)O) than with Group I (25.27 cm H(2)0) (p < 0.05), but the airway sealing pressure of Group I was very well within the normal limit to prevent aspiration. The ease of insertion was more with Group I (29/30) than with Group P (25/30) (p < 0.05). The success rate of first attempt of insertion and ease of gastric tube placement was more with Group I (p > 0.05). Blood staining of the device & tongue, lip and dental trauma was more with Group P (p >0.05). There was no evidence of bronchospasm, laryngospasm, regurgitation, aspiration or hoarseness in either group. To conclude I-gel is a novel supraglottic device with an acceptable airway sealing pressure (25.27 cm H(2)O). It is easier to insert, requires less attempts of insertion, has easier gastric tube placement and is less traumatic as compared to LMA-ProSeal. Medknow Publications 2009-06 /pmc/articles/PMC2900120/ /pubmed/20640137 Text en © Indian Journal of Anaesthesia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Investigation Singh, Ishwar Gupta, Monika Tandon, Mansi Comparison of Clinical Performance of I-Gel™ with LMA—Proseal™ in Elective Surgeries |
title | Comparison of Clinical Performance of I-Gel™ with LMA—Proseal™ in Elective Surgeries |
title_full | Comparison of Clinical Performance of I-Gel™ with LMA—Proseal™ in Elective Surgeries |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Clinical Performance of I-Gel™ with LMA—Proseal™ in Elective Surgeries |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Clinical Performance of I-Gel™ with LMA—Proseal™ in Elective Surgeries |
title_short | Comparison of Clinical Performance of I-Gel™ with LMA—Proseal™ in Elective Surgeries |
title_sort | comparison of clinical performance of i-gel™ with lma—proseal™ in elective surgeries |
topic | Clinical Investigation |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2900120/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20640137 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT singhishwar comparisonofclinicalperformanceofigelwithlmaprosealinelectivesurgeries AT guptamonika comparisonofclinicalperformanceofigelwithlmaprosealinelectivesurgeries AT tandonmansi comparisonofclinicalperformanceofigelwithlmaprosealinelectivesurgeries |