Anesthesia & Clinical Research
Open Access

Abstract

Positive Pressure Ventilation with i-gel versus LMA-Unique: A Randomised Comparative Study

R. F Danha, S. Sreevathsa, N. Crombie, C. Hillermann and C. Mendonca

Purpose: GPurpose: The present study compared the two disposable supraglottic airway devices, the LMAUnique ™ (LMA-U) and i-gel™ during positive pressure ventilation in paralysed adult patients. The aim of this randomised study is to test the hypothesis that the i-gel performs comparably to the LMA-U during elective positive pressure ventilation.

Methods: Thirty adult patients undergoing elective surgery and requiring positive pressure ventilation were randomly allocated to have the LMA-U (N=15) or i-gel for airway maintenance and positive pressure ventilation. The insertion success and time taken to insert the device, the number of insertion attempts, any manipulations required, inspired tidal volume, expired tidal volume, leak volume and leak pressure were compared.

Results: The mean insertion time (SD) for LMA-U and i-gel were 19 (4) and 13 (3) seconds respectively (p <0.0001). There was a significant difference in the number of manipulations needed to facilitate insertion with the i-gel requiring fewer manipulations than LMA-U). There was no significant difference between the mean leak volumes [mean (SD) 23 (16) vs 34 (30) ml for the LMA –U and i-gel respectively, p= 0.36], expired tidal volumes [mean (SD) 514 (69) vs 509 (82) for the LMA-U and i-gel respectively, p=0.99] and peak airway pressures [mean (SD) 15 (3) vs 14 (3) cm H2O for the LMA –U and i-gel respectively, p=0.34] for the two devices.

Conclusion: When compared to the LMA-U, the i-gel was equally effective for positive pressure ventilation. The i-gel was quicker to insert and required fewer manipulations for first time insertion.