A comparison of the single-use i-gel with the reusable laryngeal mask airway proseal in anesthetized adult patients in Japanese population

Japanese Journal of Anesthesiology

Volumn 62, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 134-139

  Hayashi, Kentaro ^a   Suzuki, Akihiro ^b   Kunisawa, Takayuki ^b   Takahata, Osamu ^b   Yamasawa, Yuzuru ^a   Iwasaki, Hiroshi ^b  

^a Kushiro Red Cross Hospital   (Japan)

^b ASAHIKAWA MEDICAL COLLEGE   (Japan)

Author keywords

Difficult intubation; I gel; Laryngeal mask airway; Proseal; Supraglottic airway device

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AIRWAY CREATION DEVICE; ANESTHESIA INDUCTION; ARTICLE; BLOOD STAIN; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; I GEL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; JAPANESE; LARYNGEAL MASK; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MOUTH CAVITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STOMACH TUBE;

ANESTHESIA, GENERAL; ASIAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTUBATION, INTRATRACHEAL; LARYNGEAL MASKS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84874157658     PISSN: 00214892     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Gasteiger L, Brimacombe J, Perkhofer D, Kaufmann M, Keller C. Comparison of guided insertion of the LMA ProSeal vs the i-gel. Anaesthesia 2010; 65 : 913-6.
2. Heuer JE, Stiller M, Rathgeber J, Eich C, Züchner K, Bauer M, Timmermann A. Evaluation of the new supraglottic airway devices Ambu AuraOnce and Intersurgical i-gel. Positioning, sealing, patient comfort and airway morbidity. Anaesthesist 2009; 58 : 813-20.
3. Gatward JJ, Cook TM, Seller C, Handel J, Simpson T, Vanek y et al. Evaluation of the size 4 i-gel airway in one hundred non-paralysed patients. Anaesthesia 2008; 63 : 1124-30.
4. Donaldson W, Abraham A, Deighan M, Michalek P. i-gel™ vs. AuraOnce™ laryngeal mask for general anaesthesia with controlled ventilation in paralyzed patients. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub 2011; 155 : 155-63.
5. Lee AK, Tey JB, Lim Y, Sia AT. Comparison of the single-use LMA supreme with the reusable ProSeal LMA for anaesthesia in gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care 2009; 37 : 815-9.
6. Verghese C, Ramaswamy B. LMA-Supreme-A new single-use LMA with gastric access : A report on its clinical efficacy. Br J Anaesth 2008; 101 : 405-10.
7. Levitan RM, Kinkle WC. Initial anatomic investigations of the I-gel airway : A novel supraglottic airway without inflatable cuff. Anaesthesia 2005; 60 : 1022-6. (Pubitemid 41387859)
8. Heuer JF, Stiller M, Rathgeber J, Eich C, Züchner K, Bauer M, et al. Evaluation of the new supraglottic airway devices Ambu AuraOnce and Intersurgical i-gel. Positioning, sealing, patient comfort and airway morbidity. Anaesthesist 2009; 58 : 813-20.
9. Singh I, Gupta M, Tandon M. Comparison of clinical performance of i-gel with LMA-Proseal in elective surgeries. Indian J Anaesth 2009; 53 : 302-5.
10. Sharma B, Sehgal R, Sahai C, Sood J. PLMA vs. Igel : A comparative evaluation of respiratory mechanics in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2010; 26 : 451-7.
11. Shin WJ, Cheong YS, Yang HS, Nishiyama T. The supraglottic airway I-gel in comparison with ProSeal laryngeal mask airway and classic laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2010; 27 : 598-601.
12. Burgard G, Möllhoff T, Prien T. The effect of laryngeal mask cuff pressure on postoperative sore throat incidence. J Clin Anesth 1996; 8 : 198-201. (Pubitemid 26139023)