Comparison of guided insertion of the LMA ProSeal vs the i-gel

Gasteiger, L., Brimacombe, J., Perkhofer, D., Kaufmann, M., and Keller, C. (2010) Comparison of guided insertion of the LMA ProSeal vs the i-gel. Anaesthesia, 65 (9). pp. 913-916.

[img] PDF (Published Version) - Published Version
Restricted to Repository staff only

View at Publisher Website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.20...

Abstract

In a randomised, non-crossover study, we tested the hypothesis that the ease of insertion using a duodenal tube guided insertion technique and the oropharyngeal leak pressure differ between the LMA ProSeal™ and the i-gel™ in non-paralysed, anesthetised female subjects. One hundred and fifty-two females aged 19–70 years were studied. Insertion success rate, insertion time and oropharyngeal leak pressure were measured. First attempt and overall insertion success were similar (LMA ProSeal, 75/76 (99%) and 76/76 (100%); i-gel 73/75 (97%) and 75 (100%), respectively). Mean (SD) insertion times were similar (LMA ProSeal, 40 (16) s; i-gel 43 (21) s). Mean oropharyngeal leak pressure was 7 cmH2O higher with the LMA ProSeal (p < 0.0001). Insertion of the LMA ProSeal and i-gel is similarly easy using a duodenal tube guided technique, but the LMA ProSeal forms a more effective seal for ventilation.

Item ID: 14986
Item Type: Article (Refereed Research - C1)
ISSN: 1365-2044
Date Deposited: 09 May 2011 02:06
FoR Codes: 11 MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES > 1103 Clinical Sciences > 110301 Anaesthesiology @ 100%
SEO Codes: 92 HEALTH > 9201 Clinical Health (Organs, Diseases and Abnormal Conditions) > 920118 Surgical Methods and Procedures @ 100%
Citation Count from Web of Science Web of Science 2
Downloads: Total: 4
More Statistics

Actions (Repository Staff Only)

Item Control Page Item Control Page