Back to Search Start Over

Performance of Size 1 I-Gel Compared with Size 1 ProSeal Laryngeal Mask in Anesthetized Infants and Neonates

Authors :
Gulay Erdogan Kayhan
Zekine Begec
Mukadder Sanli
Ender Gedik
Mahmut Durmus
Source :
The Scientific World Journal, Vol 2015 (2015)
Publication Year :
2015
Publisher :
Wiley, 2015.

Abstract

Purpose. The size 1 I-gel, recommended for small infants and neonates weighing 2–5 kg, has recently been released. There are no prospective studies available that assess the insertion conditions, sealing pressures, or ventilation quality of it. This study was designed to compare the performance of recently released size 1 I-gel with size 1 ProSeal LMA. Methods. Fifty infants and neonates, ASA I-II were included in this prospective, randomized, and controlled study. Patients were divided into two groups for placing I-gel or ProSeal LMA. The primary outcome was airway leak pressure, and secondary outcomes included insertion time, insertion success and conditions, initial airway quality, fiberoptic view of the larynx, and complications. Results. There were no significant differences in terms of airway leak pressure between the I-gel (27.44±5.67) and ProSeal LMA (23.52±8.15) (P=0.054). The insertion time for the I-gel was shorter (12.6±2.19 s) than for the ProSeal LMA (24.2±6.059 s) (P=0.0001). Insertion success and conditions were similar in groups. We encountered few complications. Conclusion. Our study demonstrates that the size 1 I-gel provided an effective and satisfactory airway as the size 1 ProSeal LMA. It may be a good alternative supraglottic airway device for use in small infants and neonates. This trial is registered with: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01704118.

Subjects

Subjects :
Technology
Medicine
Science

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
23566140 and 1537744X
Volume :
2015
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
The Scientific World Journal
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.28aa3d7d31c54b579b78c82ac72c94e0
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/426186