Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and clinical performance of LMA ProSeal™ and i-gel® in adults: Meta-analysis and systematic review

28Citations
Citations of this article
55Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials to compare the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and clinical performance of LMA ProSeal™ (Teleflex® Inc., Wayne, PA, USA) and i-gel® (Intersurgical Ltd, Wokingham, UK) in adults undergoing general anesthesia. Methods: Searches of MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, CENTRAL, KoreaMed and Google Scholar® were performed. The primary objective was to compare OLP; secondary objectives included comparison of clinical performance and complications. Results: Fourteen RCTs were included. OLP was significantly higher with LMA ProSeal™ than with i-gel® (mean difference [MD] −2.95 cmH2O; 95% confidence interval [CI] −4.30, −1.60). The i-gel® had shorter device insertion time (MD −3.01 s; 95% CI −5.80, −0.21), and lower incidences of blood on device after removal (risk ratio [RR] 0.32; 95% CI 0.18, 0.56) and sore throat (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.35, 0.89) than LMA ProSeal™. Conclusion: LMA ProSeal™ provides superior airway sealing compared to i-gel®.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Shin, H. W., Yoo, H. N., Bae, G. E., Chang, J. C., Park, M. K., You, H. S., … Ahn, H. S. (2016). Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and clinical performance of LMA ProSealTM and i-gel® in adults: Meta-analysis and systematic review. Journal of International Medical Research, 44(3), 405–418. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060515607386

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free