Comparison of i-gel™ and laryngeal mask airway Classic™ in terms of ease of insertion and hemodynamic response: A randomized observational study

CONTEXT: Laryngeal mask airway (LMA) Classic™ has an inflatable cuff while i-gel™ has a noninflatable cuff made of thermoplastic elastomer. AIMS: To compare ease of insertion, number, and duration of insertion attempts among the two device. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the hemodynamic response and SpO(2) during device insertion and during maintenance of general anesthesia. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This study was conducted as randomized observational study in a teaching hospital. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: One hundred American Society of Anesthesiologists I and II, patients posted for surgery under general anesthesia were divided in two groups of fifty each. LMA Classic™ and i-gel™. Ease of insertion, duration of insertion, hemodynamic data, and episodes of hypoxia during insertion, 1, 3 and 5 min for 30 min, during removal and 1 min after removal. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Descriptive analyses were expressed as a mean ± standard deviation. Independent t-test used for parametric data, Chi-square test for nonparametric data and hemodynamic data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA to find statistical difference within the groups. RESULTS: Devices were easy to insert, the mean duration of insertion attempts was 15.92 ± 1.62 s in the i-gel™ group, while it was 26.06 ± 5.12 s in the LMA Classic™ group, was statistically significant (P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Successful and shorter duration of insertion, with less hemodynamic response makes i-gel™ a suitable alternative to LMA Classic™ during general anesthesia.