Randomized prospective trial comparing two supraglottic airway devices: i-gel™ and LMA-Supreme™ in paralyzed patients;Étude prospective randomisée comparant deux dispositifs pour voie aérienne supraglottique: i-gel™ et LMA-Supreme™ chez des patients paralysés

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia

Volumn 61, Issue 9, 2014, Pages 794-800

  Joly, Nikola ^a   Poulin, Louis Pierre ^a,b   Tanoubi, Issam ^b   Drolet, Pierre ^b   Donati, François ^b   St Pierre, Patrick ^c  

^a CENTRE HOSPITALIER DE L UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b MAISONNEUVE ROSEMONT HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^c Pierre Boucher Hospital   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL VENTILATION; BRONCHIAL TUBE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; COUGHING; DEVICE SAFETY; DYSPHAGIA; DYSPHONIA; ELECTIVE SURGERY; ENDOSCOPY; ESOPHAGUS MUCOSA; FEMALE; GENERAL ANESTHESIA; GLOTTIS; HUMAN; LUNG PRESSURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PEAK INSPIRATORY PRESSURE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PREOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RESPIRATORY TRACT PARAMETERS; SORE THROAT; SUPRAGLOTTIC AIRWAY DEVICE; SURGICAL PATIENT; VOCAL CORD; ADVERSE EFFECTS; AGED; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEVICES; ENDOTRACHEAL INTUBATION; LARYNGEAL MASK; MIDDLE AGED; PARALYSIS; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; POSITIVE END EXPIRATORY PRESSURE;

ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTUBATION, INTRATRACHEAL; LARYNGEAL MASKS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PARALYSIS; POSITIVE-PRESSURE RESPIRATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84919928384     PISSN: 0832610X     EISSN: 14968975     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12630-014-0198-6     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Theiler LG, Kleine-Brueggeney M, Kaiser D, et al. Crossover comparison of the Laryngeal Mask Supreme™ and the i-gel™ in simulated difficult airway scenario in anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology 2009; 111: 55-62.
2. Janakiraman C, Chethan DB, Wilkes AR, Stacey MR, Goodwin N. A randomised crossover trial comparing the i-gel supraglottic airway and classic laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia 2009; 64: 674-8.
3. Weber U, Oguz R, Potura LA, Kimberger O, Kober A, Tschernko E. Comparison of the i-gel and the LMA-Unique laryngeal mask airway in patients with mild to moderate obesity during elective short-term surgery. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 481-7.
4. Gatward JJ, Cook TM, Seller C, et al. Evaluation of the size 4 i-gel airway in one hundred non-paralysed patients. Anaesthesia 2008; 63: 1124-30.
5. Richez B, Saltel L, Banchereau F, Torrielli R, Cros AM. A new single use supraglottic airway device with a noninflatable cuff and an esophageal vent: an observational study of the i-gel. Anesth Analg 2008; 106: 1137-9.
6. Uppal V, Fletcher G, Kinsella J. Comparison of the i-gel with the cuffed tracheal tube during pressure-controlled ventilation. Br J Anaesth 2009; 102: 264-8.
7. Wong DT, Yang JJ, Jagannathan N. Brief review: The LMA Supreme™ supraglottic airway. Can J Anesth 2012; 59: 483-93.
8. Keller C, Brimacombe JR, Keller K, Morris R. Comparison of four methods for assessing airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in adult patients. Br J Anaesth 1999; 82: 286-7.
9. Brimacombe J, Berry A. A proposed fiber-optic scoring system to standardize the assessment of laryngeal mask airway position. Anesth Analg 1993; 76: 457.
10. Teoh WH, Lee KM, Suhitharan T, Tahaza Z, Teo MM, Sia AT. Comparison of the LMA Supreme vs the i-gel in paralysed patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic surgery with controlled ventilation. Anaesthesia 2010; 65: 1173-9.
11. Russo SG, Cremer S, Eich C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging study of the in vivo position of the extraglottic airway devices i-gel™ and LMA-Supreme™ in anaesthetized human volunteers. Br J Anaesth 2012; 109: 996-1004.
12. Chew EE, Hashim NH, Wang CY. Randomised comparison of the LMA Supreme™ with the I-Gel™ in spontaneously breathing anaesthetised adult patients. Anaesth Intensive Care 2010; 38: 1018-22.
13. Russo SG, Cremer S, Galli T, et al. Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients. BMC Anesthesiol 2012; 12: 18.
14. Ragazzi R, Finessi L, Farinelli I, Alvisi R, Volta CA. LMA Supreme™ vs i-gel™ - a comparison of insertion success in novices. Anaesthesia 2012; 67: 384-8.
15. Chen X, Jiao J, Cong X, Liu L, Wu X. A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™ during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One 2013; 8: e71910.
16. Halwagi AE, Massicotte N, Lallo A, et al. Tracheal intubation through the I-gel™ supraglottic airway versus the LMA Fastrach™: a randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg 2012; 114: 152-6.
17. Michalek P, Donaldson W, Graham C, Hinds JD. A comparison of the I-gel supraglottic airway as a conduit for tracheal intubation with the intubating laryngeal mask airway: a manikin study. Resuscitation 2010; 81: 74-7.
18. Hernandez MR, Klock PA Jr, Ovassapian A. Evolution of the extraglottic airway: a review of its history, applications, and practical tips for success. Anesth Analg 2012; 114: 349-68.