Abstract
Summary We performed a prospective, randomised trial comparing the i-gel™ with the LMA Classic™ in children undergoing general anaesthesia. Ninety-nine healthy patients were randomly assigned to either the i-gel or the LMA Classic. The outcomes measured were airway leak pressure, ease of insertion, time taken for insertion, fibreoptic examination and complications. Median (IQR [range]) time to successful device placement was shorter with the i-gel (17.0 (13.8-20.0 [10.0-20.0]) s) compared with the LMA Classic (21.0 (17.5-25.0 [15.0-70.0]) s, p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in oropharyngeal leak pressure between the two devices. A good fibreoptic view of the glottis was obtained in 74% of the i-gel group and in 43% of the LMA Classic group (p < 0.001). There were no significant complications. In conclusion, the i-gel provided a similar leak pressure, but a shorter insertion time and improved glottic view compared with the LMA Classic in children. © Anaesthesia © 2012 The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland.
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Lee, J. R., Kim, M. S., Kim, J. T., Byon, H. J., Park, Y. H., Kim, H. S., & Kim, C. S. (2012). A randomised trial comparing the i-gelTM with the LMA ClassicTM in children. Anaesthesia, 67(6), 606–611. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2012.07072.x
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.