Cargando…

Comparison of I-gel for general anesthesia in obese and nonobese patients

CONTEXT: I-gel is a second-generation supraglottic airway device. Despite several studies on i-gel, there are very few studies on the use of i-gel in obese patients. AIMS: The aim of the study was to compare the clinical performance of i-gel between obese and nonobese patients. SETTINGS AND DESIGN:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Prabha, Rati, Raman, Rajesh, Khan, Mohammad Parvez, Kaushal, Dinesh, Siddiqui, Ahsan Khaliq, Abbas, Haider
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6180705/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30429733
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_79_18
_version_ 1783362262842474496
author Prabha, Rati
Raman, Rajesh
Khan, Mohammad Parvez
Kaushal, Dinesh
Siddiqui, Ahsan Khaliq
Abbas, Haider
author_facet Prabha, Rati
Raman, Rajesh
Khan, Mohammad Parvez
Kaushal, Dinesh
Siddiqui, Ahsan Khaliq
Abbas, Haider
author_sort Prabha, Rati
collection PubMed
description CONTEXT: I-gel is a second-generation supraglottic airway device. Despite several studies on i-gel, there are very few studies on the use of i-gel in obese patients. AIMS: The aim of the study was to compare the clinical performance of i-gel between obese and nonobese patients. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Prospective, controlled, nonrandomized, hospital-based study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: After obtaining informed consent, patients were divided into two groups of 16 patients each: group O consisted of patients with body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m(2) and Group C consisted of patients with BMI 18.5–29.9 kg/m(2). I-gel was inserted after induction of anesthesia and muscle relaxation. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) (primary outcome variable), leak fraction, time taken to insert the device, ease of insertion, fiberoptic view of glottis through i-gel's airway tube, and adverse effects were recorded. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Data were analyzed using SPSS 20. Continuous, ordinal, and categorical variables were analyzed using students t-test, Mann–Whitney U–test, and Fischer's exact test, respectively. RESULTS: OLP was slightly higher in Group O (25.38 ± 4.79 cm H(2)O) but was not statistically different than Group C (27.38 ± 4.38 cm H(2)O). Other parameters except weight and BMI (which were higher in Group O) were statistically similar in both groups. There was no statistical difference in side effects. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that i-gel is as effective in obese patients as in nonobese patients when used for securing the airway for surgical procedures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6180705
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61807052018-11-14 Comparison of I-gel for general anesthesia in obese and nonobese patients Prabha, Rati Raman, Rajesh Khan, Mohammad Parvez Kaushal, Dinesh Siddiqui, Ahsan Khaliq Abbas, Haider Saudi J Anaesth Original Article CONTEXT: I-gel is a second-generation supraglottic airway device. Despite several studies on i-gel, there are very few studies on the use of i-gel in obese patients. AIMS: The aim of the study was to compare the clinical performance of i-gel between obese and nonobese patients. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Prospective, controlled, nonrandomized, hospital-based study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: After obtaining informed consent, patients were divided into two groups of 16 patients each: group O consisted of patients with body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m(2) and Group C consisted of patients with BMI 18.5–29.9 kg/m(2). I-gel was inserted after induction of anesthesia and muscle relaxation. Oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) (primary outcome variable), leak fraction, time taken to insert the device, ease of insertion, fiberoptic view of glottis through i-gel's airway tube, and adverse effects were recorded. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Data were analyzed using SPSS 20. Continuous, ordinal, and categorical variables were analyzed using students t-test, Mann–Whitney U–test, and Fischer's exact test, respectively. RESULTS: OLP was slightly higher in Group O (25.38 ± 4.79 cm H(2)O) but was not statistically different than Group C (27.38 ± 4.38 cm H(2)O). Other parameters except weight and BMI (which were higher in Group O) were statistically similar in both groups. There was no statistical difference in side effects. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that i-gel is as effective in obese patients as in nonobese patients when used for securing the airway for surgical procedures. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6180705/ /pubmed/30429733 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_79_18 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Saudi Journal of Anesthesia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Prabha, Rati
Raman, Rajesh
Khan, Mohammad Parvez
Kaushal, Dinesh
Siddiqui, Ahsan Khaliq
Abbas, Haider
Comparison of I-gel for general anesthesia in obese and nonobese patients
title Comparison of I-gel for general anesthesia in obese and nonobese patients
title_full Comparison of I-gel for general anesthesia in obese and nonobese patients
title_fullStr Comparison of I-gel for general anesthesia in obese and nonobese patients
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of I-gel for general anesthesia in obese and nonobese patients
title_short Comparison of I-gel for general anesthesia in obese and nonobese patients
title_sort comparison of i-gel for general anesthesia in obese and nonobese patients
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6180705/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30429733
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_79_18
work_keys_str_mv AT prabharati comparisonofigelforgeneralanesthesiainobeseandnonobesepatients
AT ramanrajesh comparisonofigelforgeneralanesthesiainobeseandnonobesepatients
AT khanmohammadparvez comparisonofigelforgeneralanesthesiainobeseandnonobesepatients
AT kaushaldinesh comparisonofigelforgeneralanesthesiainobeseandnonobesepatients
AT siddiquiahsankhaliq comparisonofigelforgeneralanesthesiainobeseandnonobesepatients
AT abbashaider comparisonofigelforgeneralanesthesiainobeseandnonobesepatients