open access

Vol 50, No 4 (2018)
Original and clinical articles
Published online: 2018-09-05
Submitted: 2017-02-15
Accepted: 2018-05-25
Get Citation

Analysing the efficacy of the I-gel supraglottic airway device in the supine and lateral decubitus positions

Kemal Tolga Saracoglu, Ali Demir, Gokhan Pehlivan, Ayten Saracoglu, Zeynep Eti
DOI: 10.5603/AIT.a2018.0028
·
Pubmed: 30221337
·
Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther 2018;50(4):259-262.

open access

Vol 50, No 4 (2018)
Original and clinical articles
Published online: 2018-09-05
Submitted: 2017-02-15
Accepted: 2018-05-25

Abstract

Background: The advantages of the I-gel supraglottic airway device include ease and speed of insertion, reduced
trauma incidence, an integral bite block, gastric access, a non-inflatable cuff and superior seal pressure. The primary
goal of this study was to compare airway leak pressures and the fibreoptic view in the supine and lateral positions.
Our secondary aim was to analyse the effects of I-gel insertion on haemodynamic parameters.

Methods: One hundred patients undergoing saturation biopsy due to prostatic hyperplasia were recruited to this prospective
randomised study. An I-gel device was inserted in the supine position. Taking of measurements, patients were
placed in the lateral decubitus position. Mean arterial pressure, heart rate, peripheral O2 saturation and end-tidal CO2
were recorded before and after insertion. We recorded the number of attempts and insertion time for the I-gel device.
Oropharyngeal leak pressures and I-gel device positioning were scored in the lateral decubitus and supine positions.

Results: It was possible to insert the I-gel device in 88 patients on the first attempt. The median time for insertion
was 7.97 ± 2.18 sec. The mean arterial pressure and heart rate decreased 1 and 2 min after insertion. Oropharyngeal
leak pressure was similar in the supine (27.45 ± 5.37 mm Hg) and lateral decubitus positions (26.04 ± 4.92 mm Hg)
(P > 0.05). On fibreoptic examination through the I-gel device, the scores of patients were comparable in different
positions (P = 0.542).

Conclusion: As there was no significant difference in oropharyngeal leak pressure and fibreoptic view, we concluded
that the I-gel device may be used safely in both the supine and lateral positions.

Abstract

Background: The advantages of the I-gel supraglottic airway device include ease and speed of insertion, reduced
trauma incidence, an integral bite block, gastric access, a non-inflatable cuff and superior seal pressure. The primary
goal of this study was to compare airway leak pressures and the fibreoptic view in the supine and lateral positions.
Our secondary aim was to analyse the effects of I-gel insertion on haemodynamic parameters.

Methods: One hundred patients undergoing saturation biopsy due to prostatic hyperplasia were recruited to this prospective
randomised study. An I-gel device was inserted in the supine position. Taking of measurements, patients were
placed in the lateral decubitus position. Mean arterial pressure, heart rate, peripheral O2 saturation and end-tidal CO2
were recorded before and after insertion. We recorded the number of attempts and insertion time for the I-gel device.
Oropharyngeal leak pressures and I-gel device positioning were scored in the lateral decubitus and supine positions.

Results: It was possible to insert the I-gel device in 88 patients on the first attempt. The median time for insertion
was 7.97 ± 2.18 sec. The mean arterial pressure and heart rate decreased 1 and 2 min after insertion. Oropharyngeal
leak pressure was similar in the supine (27.45 ± 5.37 mm Hg) and lateral decubitus positions (26.04 ± 4.92 mm Hg)
(P > 0.05). On fibreoptic examination through the I-gel device, the scores of patients were comparable in different
positions (P = 0.542).

Conclusion: As there was no significant difference in oropharyngeal leak pressure and fibreoptic view, we concluded
that the I-gel device may be used safely in both the supine and lateral positions.

Get Citation

Keywords

airway device, I-gel; airway device, insertion; positioning

About this article
Title

Analysing the efficacy of the I-gel supraglottic airway device in the supine and lateral decubitus positions

Journal

Anaesthesiology Intensive Therapy

Issue

Vol 50, No 4 (2018)

Pages

259-262

Published online

2018-09-05

DOI

10.5603/AIT.a2018.0028

Pubmed

30221337

Bibliographic record

Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther 2018;50(4):259-262.

Keywords

airway device
I-gel
airway device
insertion
positioning

Authors

Kemal Tolga Saracoglu
Ali Demir
Gokhan Pehlivan
Ayten Saracoglu
Zeynep Eti

References (19)
  1. Sharma B, Sehgal R, Sahai C, et al. PLMA vs. I-gel: A comparative evaluation of respiratory mechanics in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2010; 26(4): 451–457.
  2. Gatward JJ, Thomas MJC, Nolan JP, et al. Effect of chest compressions on the time taken to insert airway devices in a manikin. Br J Anaesth. 2008; 100(3): 351–356.
  3. Hughes C, Place K, Berg S, et al. A clinical evaluation of the I-gel ™ supraglottic airway device in children. Paediatr Anaesth. 2012; 22(8): 765–771.
  4. Ragazzi R, Finessi L, Farinelli I, et al. LMA Supreme™ vs i-gel™ — a comparison of insertion success in novices. Anaesthesia. 2012; 67(4): 384–388.
  5. 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(2): 264–268.
  6. Bamgbade OA, Macnab WR, Khalaf WM. Evaluation of the i-gel airway in 300 patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2008; 25(10): 865–866.
  7. Kannaujia A, Srivastava U, Saraswat N, et al. A preliminary study of I-gel: a new supraglottic airway device. Indian J Anaesth. 2009; 53(1): 52–56.
  8. Sanuki T, Uda R, Sugioka S, et al. The influence of head and neck position on ventilation with the i-gel airway in paralysed, anaesthetised patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2011; 28(8): 597–599.
  9. Park SH, Han SH, Do SH, et al. The influence of head and neck position on the oropharyngeal leak pressure and cuff position of three supraglottic airway devices. Anesth Analg. 2009; 108(1): 112–117.
  10. Kim JT, Na HS, Bae JY, et al. Flexion compromises ventilation with the laryngeal tube suction II in children. Paediatr Anaesth. 2009; 19(2): 153–158.
  11. 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(10): 1124–1130.
  12. Francksen H, Renner J, Hanss R, et al. A comparison of the i-gel with the LMA-Unique in non-paralysed anaesthetised adult patients. Anaesthesia. 2009; 64(10): 1118–1124.
  13. Lopez-Gil M, Brimacombe J, Garcia G. A randomized non-crossover study comparing the ProSeal and Classic laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized children. Br J Anaesth. 2005; 95(6): 827–830.
  14. Wharton NM, Gibbison B, Gabbott DA, et al. I-gel insertion by novices in manikins and patients. Anaesthesia. 2008; 63(9): 991–995.
  15. Weber U, Oguz R, Potura LA, et al. 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(6): 481–487.
  16. Janakiraman C, Chethan DB, Wilkes AR, et al. A randomised crossover trial comparing the i-gel supraglottic airway and classic laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia. 2009; 64(6): 674–678.
  17. 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(1): 55–62.
  18. Amini S, Khoshfetrat M. Comparison of the Intersurgical Solus laryngeal mask airway and the i-gel supralaryngeal device. Anaesthesia. 2010; 65(8): 805–809.
  19. Richez B, Saltel L, Banchereau F, et al. 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(4): 1137–9, table of contents.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

VM Media sp. z o.o. VM Group sp.k., Grupa Via Medica, Świętokrzyska 73 St., 80–180 Gdańsk

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl